Name *

Email Address *

Phone *

India +91

Submit

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was introduced through the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, to reform the process of appointing judges to the higher judiciary in India. It aimed to replace the collegium system with a more transparent and accountable mechanism. However, the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) as unconstitutional in 2015, restoring the collegium system. This article explores the structure, function, and reasons behind the invalidation of the NJAC.

History and Evolution of Judicial Appointments in India

Before the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), judicial appointments in India were primarily governed by the collegium system, which was established through Supreme Court judgments in the Three Judges Cases. This system granted the Chief Justice of India and senior judges control over the appointment and transfer of judges, ensuring judicial independence but also raising concerns about transparency.

Also Read: UPSC Prelims Syllabus

Article 124 in the Constitution of India

Article 124 of the Indian Constitution deals with the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court of India. The article lays down the framework for the number of judges in the Supreme Court, their appointment process, qualifications, and removal. Here’s a simplified explanation:

Structure of the Supreme Court

• The Supreme Court of India consists of a Chief Justice of India and up to seven other Judges, unless Parliament decides to increase the number by law.

Appointment of Judges

• Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of India after consulting the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), as mentioned in Article 124A.
• They hold office until they reach the age of 65 years.
• A judge can resign by writing to the President or can be removed under specific procedures (explained below).

Qualification for Appointment

• To become a Judge of the Supreme Court, a person must:
  • Be a citizen of India.
  • Have served as a Judge of a High Court for at least five years or have been an advocate in a High Court for ten years.
  • Alternatively, if the President considers a person to be a distinguished jurist, they can also be appointed as a judge.

Removal of Judges

• A Judge can be removed from office only by an order from the President of India after a process where both Houses of Parliament pass a motion for removal.
• The motion must be supported by a majority of the total members of Parliament, and at least two-thirds of the members present and voting.

Judicial Independence

• Once appointed, a Supreme Court Judge cannot practice law in any court in India.

Oath of Office

• Before starting their duties, every new Supreme Court Judge must take an oath or affirmation, administered by the President of India, as per the form laid out in the Third Schedule of the Constitution.

Also Read: UPSC Study Material for IAS Exam 2025

National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was introduced to make the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts more structured and transparent. It was designed to make the appointment process more accountable and reduce judicial overreach.

Key Features of NJAC

Also Read: UPSC Eligibility

Key Features of the NJAC

• A six-member body responsible for recommending judicial appointments.
• Included non-judicial members to increase transparency.
• Required a majority consensus for judicial selections.
• Veto power granted to any two members.
• Aimed to eliminate nepotism in judicial appointments.

NJAC Full Form

The full form of NJAC is the National Judicial Appointments Commission. This body was constituted to bring reforms in the appointment and transfer of judges, reducing the exclusive control of the judiciary in selecting its own members.

Also Read: UPSC Exam 2025 

Collegium vs NJAC UPSC

Understanding the difference between the collegium system and NJAC is crucial for legal and UPSC aspirants.

The NJAC was seen as a way to balance judicial independence and executive participation in appointments, while the collegium system retained judicial supremacy.

Arguments in Favor of NJAC

• Transparency: Included non-judicial members for accountability.
• Executive Oversight: Reduced judicial exclusivity in appointments.
• Merit-Based Selections: Aimed to prevent favoritism and ensure diversity.
• Public Confidence: Allowed greater participation in judicial appointments.

Also Read: UPSC Syllabus

Arguments Against NJAC

• Judicial Independence Threatened: Allowed political interference.
• Veto Power Concerns: Any two members could block an appointment.
• Violation of Separation of Powers: Gave the executive a role in judicial matters.
• Lack of Clear Selection Criteria: Process was still subjective.

Why NJAC was Struck Down by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India struck down the NJAC in 2015 through a landmark judgment in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India. The key reasons were:

• It diluted judicial independence by allowing external members in judge selection.
• The presence of the Law Minister raised concerns over political influence.
• The veto power of non-judicial members undermined the Chief Justice’s authority.

This ruling reinstated the collegium system, ensuring that judges retain control over judicial appointments.

Why was NJAC Declared Unconstitutional?

The NJAC was declared unconstitutional as it violated the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that judicial independence is a fundamental feature, and any system that compromises this principle is invalid.

The decision ensured that the judiciary remained independent and free from political pressure, safeguarding democracy.

Impact of the Supreme Court’s Verdict on NJAC

• Restored the Collegium System as the sole appointment process.
• Reaffirmed Judicial Independence by preventing executive interference.
• Raised Calls for Further Reforms in judicial appointments.
• Maintained the Separation of Powers as a fundamental constitutional principle.

Current System of Judicial Appointments in India (Post NJAC)

After the NJAC was struck down, the collegium system was reinstated, continuing as the prevailing method for appointing judges. Despite criticisms of opacity and favoritism, no alternative mechanism has replaced it. Recent discussions focus on introducing greater transparency and accountability in judicial appointments.

Conclusion

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was an ambitious attempt to reform the judicial appointment process, making it more transparent and accountable. However, the Supreme Court’s decision to strike it down highlighted the need to uphold judicial independence. While the collegium system continues, discussions on improving judicial appointments remain relevant to ensuring a fair and impartial judiciary in India.

Are you preparing for UPSC 2025? Join IAShub’s UPSC coaching batches to boost your preparation. Enroll now!

National Judicial Appointments Commission FAQs