Collegium Recommendations and Judicial Appointments

The pace of appointments through Collegium recommendations has increased but still cannot match retirements and rising filings, stressing the judiciary.

Significance of Article 124(3)(c) and Article 217(2)(c)

• Article 124(3)(c): Allows for the appointment of 'distinguished jurists' as judges of the Supreme Court.
• Article 217(2)(c): Previously allowed similar appointments in High Courts, now repealed without reason.
• No jurist appointments have been made under these provisions in India.

Benefits of Appointing Distinguished Jurists

• Introducing jurists into the judiciary can offer specialized knowledge, and research-based critical thinking.
• Countries like the US, Poland, and Spain have benefited from appointing jurists as judges.
• Academia can enhance judicial discourse and decision-making, providing fresh perspectives.

Challenges in Appointing Jurists

• Lack of courtroom experience and procedural knowledge.
• Resistance from within the judicial institution.

Solutions and Recommendations

• The government should comply with Collegium recommendations promptly.
• Re-introducing Article 217(2)(c) could fill vacancies by appointing distinguished jurists.
• Training in procedural know-how is essential for academic appointees.

The integration of academic minds into the judiciary promises a dynamic, robust, and diverse system, grounded in constitutional principles and practical realities.