Recently, Supreme Court agreed to consider a PIL questioning the Collegium system for appointment of judges in the top court and the High Courts and seeking revival of the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC).

About the NJAC Act, 2014

• Constitutional Amendment: Established by the 99th Constitutional Amendment to replace the Collegium system for higher Judiciary appointments.
• Composition: Appointments to be recommended by a six-member commission: the CJI, two senior Supreme Court judges, the Union Law Minister, and two eminent persons.
• Judicial Verdict: Struck down in the Fourth Judges Case (2015), for violating 'Basic Structure' (Judicial Independence).

Concerns with the Collegium

• Opaqueness and Accountability Deficit: Collegium decisions are not answerable to any external authority—neither Parliament nor the executive.
• Exclusionary Nature: Collegium has been criticised for under-representation of women judges, inadequate presence from marginalized communities, etc.
• Constitutional ambiguity: Collegium system emerged from judicial interpretation (Three Judges Cases) undermining the principle that Parliament should determine institutional design.
• Vacancy: Persistent standoffs between the Collegium and Executive delay appointments. 

Conclusion

While the Collegium system safeguards judicial independence, the concerns highlight the need for reform, such as a restructured National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) with safeguards, or a collegium-plus model ensuring transparency, accountability, and diversity.