- Why in news
- On 23 July 2026, the Law Minister told the Rajya Sabha in a written reply that judges are appointed under the 1998 Memorandum of Procedure, and that the NJAC Act and the 99th Amendment were struck down in 2015.
- What it is
- The Collegium is the system by which the Supreme Court and High Court judges are recommended. It grew out of the Second and Third Judges cases and is not named in the Constitution. The NJAC was a 2014 attempt to replace it with a commission, but the Supreme Court struck it down.
- Constitutional articles
- Appointments to the Supreme Court and High Courts are governed by Articles 124, 217 and 224.
- Origin of the MoP
- The Memorandum of Procedure was prepared in 1998 after the Second Judges case (1993), read with the Third Judges case advisory opinion (1998).
- Who initiates proposals
- For the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India initiates the proposal. For a High Court, the Chief Justice of that High Court does.
- Judges cases
- The First Judges case (1981) gave primacy to the executive. The Second Judges case (1993) gave primacy to the CJI and created the Collegium.
Don’t confuse with NJAC vs Collegium: The NJAC was a statutory and constitutional commission with executive members, struck down in 2015. The Collegium is a judicial creation that follows the 1998 MoP.
Don’t confuse with Second vs Third Judges case: The Second Judges case (1993) created the Collegium. The Third Judges case (1998) was a Presidential Reference opinion that set its size and process.
Laws, judgments and statutory bodies: 30 Prelims questions since 2013 (what the law says, who chairs, legal basis). In Mains, 44 news-triggered questions, most in GS2, asking for provisions and challenges.
Why it matters
- The method of appointing judges shapes the independence of the judiciary, a part of the basic structure.
- A clear and fair process builds public trust in the courts.
Problems
- The Collegium is criticised for opacity and for having no formal criteria.
- Vacancies and delays arise from the back-and-forth between the Executive and the Judiciary.
- The executive wants a bigger say, while the judiciary guards its primacy.
Way forward
- Publish clear eligibility criteria and reasons for selections to increase transparency.
- Revise the MoP and set time limits for each stage for both the Executive and the Judiciary.
- Build consensus on a balanced mechanism that protects judicial independence.
Put in your answer
Judges cases: The 1993 Second Judges case and the 1998 Third Judges case set the Collegium's primacy and process.
- 2017Mains GS2 · Q2Critically examine the Supreme Court's judgement striking down the NJAC Act 2014.
- 2025Mains GS2 · Q13Discuss the evolution of collegium system and compare Indian and US judicial appointments.
- 2025Mains GS2 · Q11Explain constitutional morality and balancing judicial independence with judicial accountability in India.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Prelims practice · Single answer
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements about the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts in India: 1. Articles 124, 217 and 224 of the Constitution govern these appointments. 2. Under the Memorandum of Procedure, a proposal for appointment to a High Court is initiated by the Chief Justice of India. 3. The Supreme Court struck down the Ninety-Ninth Amendment and the NJAC Act in 2015, and the earlier Collegium system was restored. 4. The Collegium system was created by the First Judges case (1981).
How many of the statements given above are correct?
True or false?
1 of 6
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.Appointments of Supreme Court and High Court judges are governed by Articles 124, 217 and 224 of the Constitution.
True. Articles 124, 217 and 224 govern these appointments.
2.The Memorandum of Procedure for judicial appointments was prepared in 1998, following the Second Judges case, read with the Third Judges case advisory opinion.
True. The MoP was prepared in 1998 pursuant to the 1993 judgment and the 1998 opinion.
3.Under the MoP, proposals for appointment to a High Court are initiated by the Chief Justice of India.
False. The Chief Justice of the concerned High Court initiates High Court proposals.
4.After the NJAC was struck down, the pre-existing Collegium system was declared operative.
True. The Collegium system as it existed before the 99th Amendment was restored.
5.The Collegium system was created by the First Judges case (1981).
False. The Collegium was created by the Second Judges case (1993). The First Judges case (1981) gave primacy to the executive.
6.The Collegium is expressly provided for in Article 124 of the Constitution.
False. The Collegium is not mentioned in the Constitution. It evolved through judicial interpretation.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
Mains practice
15 marks · 250 words
The Law Minister recently told the Rajya Sabha that judges are appointed under the 1998 Memorandum of Procedure, and that the NJAC Act and the Ninety-Ninth Amendment were struck down in 2015. In this light, critically examine the Collegium system of judicial appointments. Discuss the constitutional issues raised by the NJAC judgment and suggest a way forward.
Worth revising until Prelims 2028: most news questions come within two years of the event.