UPSC DAW 23rd October 2025 Mains Answer Writing - 2026

UPSC DAW 23rd October 2025 Mains Answer Writing - 2026

Question

Trace the evolution of the Collegium System in India for the appointment of judges. Critically examine the issues associated with it and suggest suitable reforms to make the process more transparent, accountable, and inclusive.(250 Words, 15 Marks). 

Model Answer

Approach: Introduction: 

  • Briefly define the meaning of the collegium system and its current status. 

Body: 

  • Mention the evolution of the collegium system through relevant case laws and then suggest some potential reforms. 

Conclusion: 

  • Conclude by mentioning the need for maintaining a balance between judicial independence and transparency. 

 Introduction: 

  •  The Collegium System in India, evolved through the Three Judges Cases, governs appointments and transfers in the higher judiciary to uphold judicial independence. However, its lack of transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness has drawn criticism, highlighting the urgent need for reforms to ensure a more open and credible judicial appointment process. 

   Body: Evolution of the Collegium System in India:  

  • First Judges Case (1981): Upheld executive primacy in appointments; consultation with the CJI did not mean concurrence. 

  • Second Judges Case (1993): Shifted to judicial primacy; created the collegium system, making the CJI’s opinion binding after consulting two senior-most judges. 

  • Third Judges Case (1998): Formalized the current collegium—CJI + four senior-most SC judges for Supreme Court appointments. 

  • NJAC Verdict (2015): Struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission, reaffirming collegium supremacy on grounds of protecting judicial independence. 

 Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Appointments: 

  • Article 124: SC judges appointed by the President after consultation with CJI and other judges deemed necessary. 

  • Article 217: HC judges appointed by the President after consultation with the CJI, Governor of the state, and Chief Justice of the High Court concerned. 

  Issues Associated with the Collegium System:  

  • Lack of Transparency: The collegium works without a written manual or clear selection criteria. Decisions and reasons for appointments or transfers are rarely disclosed, making the process opaque. 

  • Nepotism and Favouritism: Allegations of self-selection and preference to relatives or known persons persist. The 2009 Law Commission observed widespread nepotism and political privilege in judicial appointments. 

  • Weak Checks and Balances: The collegium completely excludes the executive, undermining institutional accountability and violating the principle of checks and balances envisioned in the Constitution. 

  • Delay and Rising Vacancies: Slow recommendations and approval processes have led to persistent vacancies — as of August 2022, there were 3 in the Supreme Court and around 380 in High Courts — worsening pendency of cases. 

  • Lack of Diversity and Representation: Women and marginalized communities remain underrepresented. Currently, only 4 of 33 Supreme Court judges and about 11.5% of High Court judges are women. 

  • Reform Rejection and Internal Discord: The NJAC (2015) could have brought transparency and balanced participation but was struck down by the Supreme Court. Frequent lack of consensus among collegium members and mistrust further delay decisions.  

 Potential Reforms in the Collegium System::  

  • Revise Memorandum of Procedure (MoP): Involve both judiciary and executive in appointments with clear checks and balances while retaining judicial primacy. 

  • Independent Appointments Body: Set up a permanent, independent commission to institutionalize appointments and ensure accountability. 

  • Transparency Measures: Maintain records of all applicants and document collegium discussions and decisions for greater openness. 

  • Wider Eligibility Criteria: Include objective merit-based parameters and allow open applications to ensure fairness. 

  • Promote Diversity: Ensure adequate representation of women and marginalized groups in judicial appointments. 

  • Revisit NJAC Model: Explore a constitutionally valid version of NJAC with safeguards ensuring transparency and judicial independence.  

Conclusion: 

  •  While preserving judicial independence and ensuring separation of powers are paramount, the Collegium System needs reform to enhance transparency, accountability, and institutional integrity. Strengthening checks and balances, promoting diversity and inclusiveness, and ensuring merit-based and time-bound appointments can reinforce public trust and uphold the constitutional vision of an independent, impartial, and accountable judiciary — the true guardian of the rule of law and constitutional morality in India.