Judicial Diversity & Appointments Reform: Constitutional Debate on Representation and Regional Benches

Why in the News?

A Private Member’s Bill has been introduced in Parliament proposing constitutional amendments to promote diversity in judicial appointments and to establish regional benches of the Supreme Court of India.

The Bill has revived debate over judicial independence, representational equity, the collegium system, and structural reforms in the higher judiciary.

Constitutional Provisions on Judicial Appointments

The Constitution of India provides the framework for appointing judges to the higher judiciary.

Supreme Court

• Article 124: Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

High Courts

• Article 217: High Court judges are appointed by the President after consultation with:
  • The Chief Justice of India
  • The Governor of the concerned State
  • The Chief Justice of the concerned High Court

Seat of the Supreme Court

• Article 130: The Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or any other place as decided by the CJI with the approval of the President.

Initially, appointments were dominated by executive primacy. However, concerns regarding judicial independence led to a reinterpretation of constitutional provisions by the judiciary.

Evolution of the Collegium System

The collegium system was not created by constitutional amendment but through judicial interpretation.

First Judges Case (1981)

The Supreme Court upheld executive primacy in judicial appointments.

Second Judges Case (1993)

The Court reversed its earlier stance and established the collegium system, granting primacy to the judiciary.

Third Judges Case (1998)

Clarified the composition and functioning of the collegium.

Composition

• For Supreme Court: CJI + four senior-most judges
• For High Courts: CJI + two senior-most judges

Recommendations are sent to the Central Government, which may return them once for reconsideration. If reiterated, the government is constitutionally bound to appoint.

Criticisms of the Collegium

• Lack of transparency
• Absence of objective criteria
• Allegations of nepotism
• Limited diversity

NJAC and Judicial Independence

In 2014, Parliament enacted the 99th Constitutional Amendment to establish the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, creating the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).

Composition of NJAC

• Chief Justice of India
• Two senior-most judges
• Union Law Minister
• Two eminent persons

However, in 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC as unconstitutional, holding that it violated the Basic Structure Doctrine by undermining judicial independence.

Thus, the collegium system continues to function.

Diversity in the Judiciary

The current debate focuses on inadequate representation of marginalised communities in higher judicial appointments.

Data Highlights (2018–2024)

• Approximately 20% of appointees belonged to SC, ST, and OBC categories
• Women’s representation remains below 15%
• Religious minorities below 5%

The Private Member’s Bill proposes constitutional mandates for due representation of:

• Scheduled Castes
• Scheduled Tribes
• Other Backward Classes
• Women
• Religious minorities

The proposal marks a shift from a purely merit-based model toward a socially representative judiciary.

Constitutional Values at Stake

The debate involves balancing two core constitutional principles:

• Judicial Independence
• Substantive Equality and Social Justice

Supporters argue that a diverse judiciary:

• Enhances public trust
• Improves sensitivity in adjudication
• Reflects India’s pluralistic society
• Strengthens democratic legitimacy

Opponents caution against excessive politicisation or quota-based appointments in constitutional courts.

Proposal for Regional Benches of the Supreme Court

Currently, the Supreme Court functions only from New Delhi.

As of January 2026, over 90,000 cases are pending before the Court.

The Bill proposes regional benches in:

• New Delhi
• Kolkata
• Mumbai
• Chennai

These benches would handle all matters except constitutional cases, which would remain with Constitution Benches in Delhi.

Legal Basis

Under Article 130, regional benches can be created without constitutional amendment, as the CJI may designate alternate seats with presidential approval.

The idea has been previously recommended by:

• Law Commission of India
• Parliamentary Standing Committees

Rationale

• Improved access to justice
• Reduced litigation costs
• Faster disposal of cases
• Regional judicial accessibility

Way Forward

Ensuring diversity in the judiciary requires systemic reform within the collegium process, including:

• Greater transparency
• Publicly available selection criteria
• Data-driven evaluation
• Periodic diversity audits

A long-term solution may involve revisiting a broad-based appointments commission that safeguards independence while ensuring accountability.

International examples such as the UK and South Africa demonstrate that participatory appointment systems can coexist with judicial autonomy.

Regarding regional benches, a phased implementation strategy may be adopted, beginning with one bench and expanding based on performance and administrative feasibility.

Significance

• Revives debate on balance between independence and accountability
• Highlights representational gaps in constitutional institutions
• Raises questions about access to justice
• Impacts federal structure and judicial administration
• Could shape the future architecture of India’s higher judiciary

The issue represents a pivotal constitutional moment in redefining the character and accessibility of India’s judiciary.