The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea seeking review of its nine-judge bench historic verdict of 1993 by which the collegium system of judges appointing judges came into force and the earlier practice of the executive exercising that power was done away with.

A three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S.A. Bobde and N.V. Ramana, considered the review petition of the National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Reforms and Transparency (NLCJRT) and dismissed it by saying “no case for review of the impugned judgment has been made out”.

“There is an inordinate delay of 9,071 days (over 24 years) in filing the instant petition, for which no satisfactory explanation has been offered by the petitioners. Thus, though the present petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay itself, yet we have carefully gone through the review petition and the papers connected therewith,” said the order on November 6.

“We are satisfied that no case for review of the impugned judgment has been made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed, both on the ground of delay, as well as, on merits,” it said.

The bench had heard and decided the matter in an in-chamber proceedings on October 16.

What is the collegium system?

The collegium system is a forum including the CJI and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court which recommends appointments and transfers of judges.

Judges of the higher judiciary are appointed only through the collegium system, and the government has a role only after names have been decided by the collegium.

Names recommended for appointment by a High Court collegium reaches the government only after approval by the CJI and the SC collegium.

The government’s role is limited to getting an inquiry conducted by the Intelligence Bureau (IB) if a lawyer is to be elevated as a judge at a High Court or the Supreme Court. It can also raise objections and seek clarifications regarding the collegium’s choices, but if the collegium reiterates the same names, the government is bound, under Constitution bench judgments, to appoint them as judges.

What was the review petition for?

NLCJRT president Mathews J. Nedumpara said the plea asked the apex court to restore the pre-1993 position under which the final authority on appointments and transfers of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts vested with the Centre.

Under Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution, the president is empowered to appoint and transfer judges in higher judiciary in consultation with the CJI.

The nine-judge bench judgment, also known as the second judges case, held that the expression “consultation” means the mandatory “concurrence” of the CJI.

Prior to the verdict, the executive had primacy in the appointment and transfer of judges.

Later, in 1998, on a presidential reference, another nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld the 1993 judgment and introduced the collegium system of appointment of judges where the collegium led by the CJI had the primacy.

NJAC Act

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was a proposed body to replace the collegium system.

The NJAC was established with amendment of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014, passed by the Lok Sabha on August 13, 2014, and by the Rajya Sabha on August 14, 2014.

The NJAC Act and the Constitutional Amendment Act came into force from April 13, 2015.

However, on October 16, 2015, a five-judge Constitution bench by 4:1 majority upheld the collegium system and struck down the NJAC as unconstitutional.

Manorama Yearbook app is now available on Google Play Store and iOS App Store