The collegium system of judicial appointments in India is one of the most contentious mechanisms for selecting judges, primarily due to its lack of explicit constitutional foundation and allegations that it undermines the principles of separation of powers, judicial accountability, and independence. The system’s evolution has been shaped by key judicial decisions, including the landmark three judges’ cases, which expanded the scope of “consultation” under Articles 124(2) and 217, effectively reinforcing the collegium system.
This paper critically analyses the history of the collegium system in India, examining the usage of the word "consultation" in the Constitution. It further explores the most recent NJAC (National Judicial Appointments Commission) case, or the fourth judges’ case, which represents the latest confrontation between the executive and the judiciary. This case reflects ongoing tensions over judicial appointments and the potential encroachment of legislative authority into the judicial domain. Additionally, the paper discusses the reasons for the failure of both the NJAC and the collegium system and provides suggestions for improving the judicial appointment process by the collegium system.
