Q2 · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2017 · GS II · 10 marks · 3 min read

← Q11

Critically examine the Supreme Court's judgement on 'National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014' with reference to appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India.

Topic: Executive and Judiciary. Syllabus: Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary — Ministries and Departments of the Government; pressure groups and formal/informal associations and their role in the Polity. Same official PYQ from year-wise 2017 and Executive and Judiciary.

Revision summary

The Second and Third Judges Cases made the collegium the method of appointing Supreme Court and High Court judges. The 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act, 2014, tried to share that power with the Law Minister and two eminent persons. SCAORA (2015) struck both down as damaging basic-structure judicial primacy, with Justice Chelameswar dissenting. The Court asked for a better Memorandum of Procedure; that transparency work is still unfinished. Independence of appointment was protected; openness of appointment was not delivered by the judgment alone.

Model answer

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  C[Collegium Second and Third Judges Cases] --> N[99th Amendment and NJAC Act 2014]
  N --> S[SCAORA 2015 struck down]
  S --> P[Judicial primacy restored]
  S --> M[Memorandum of Procedure pending]
  P --> I[Independent higher judiciary]

Conclusion

  • Finalise a Memorandum of Procedure with written reasons, eligibility criteria and a timeline for filling High Court vacancies.
  • Keep judicial primacy, but add a secretariat and limited non-judge inputs on integrity and diversity, without a political veto of the 2014 kind.

The 2015 judgment saved judicial primacy in appointments and struck down the NJAC and the 99th Amendment as a threat to independence. It did not cure the collegium’s secrecy. Higher-judiciary appointment in India still needs a transparent, judge-led process, not a return to executive veto dressed as a commission.

Quick related

Students also ask

  • Did the 2015 Court say Parliament can never change appointments?

    No. It said this Commission, with a political veto, damaged judicial primacy. A better-designed, judge-led process with more transparency was left open through the Memorandum of Procedure.

  • Is the NJAC Act still in force?

    No. Once the 99th Amendment was void, the Act had no constitutional peg and did not operate.

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2025 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks

    "Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…"In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.

    View answer →

  2. 2025 · Q13 · GS II · 15 marks

    Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA.

    View answer →

  3. 2024 · Q14 · GS II · 15 marks

    Explain the reasons for the growth of public interest litigation in India. As a result of it, has the Indian Supreme Court emerged as the world's most powerful judiciary ?

    View answer →

  4. 2022 · Q1 · GS II · 10 marks

    "The most significant achievement of modern law in India is the constitutionalization of environmental problems by the Supreme Court." Discuss this statement with the help of relevant case laws.

    View answer →

  5. 2021 · Q2 · GS II · 10 marks

    Discuss the desirability of greater representation to women in the higher judiciary to ensure diversity, equity and inclusiveness.

    View answer →

  6. 2018 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks

    Whether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi? Examine. (15).

    View answer →

More from this topic

Q13 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 15 marks

Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA.

Executive and Judiciary

First Judges Case gave the executive primacy; Second and Third Judges Cases created the collegium of the CJI and senior colleagues. NJAC (99th Amendment) was struck down in 2015; the collegium returned, still criticised for opacity and delay. The US President nominates Supreme Court Justices; the Senate confirms; tenure is effectively for life. India’s gain is insulation from a sudden majority; its cost is unexplained selection. America’s gain is public democratic input; its cost is partisan life tenure.

Q11 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 15 marks

"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…"In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.

Executive and Judiciary

Ambedkar treated constitutional morality as cultivated respect for constitutional forms in an unequal society. The Court has used it in Manoj Narula, NCT of Delhi, Navtej Johar and Sabarimala as process plus dignity against convenience. It checks both high office and majoritarian citizens. Judicial independence (tenure, collegium, basic structure) is one application; accountability (impeachment, in-house, Veeraswami, open reasons) is the other. NJAC 2015 protected independence; unexplained collegium power still fails the same morality if it will not give reasons.

Q14 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 15 marks

Explain the reasons for the growth of public interest litigation in India. As a result of it, has the Indian Supreme Court emerged as the world's most powerful judiciary ?

Executive and Judiciary

Public interest litigation grew because the Court stopped insisting that only a personally injured plaintiff could knock. Hussainara Khatoon read speedy trial into Article 21 for Bihar undertrials. S.P. Gupta opened standing; Bandhua Mukti Morcha let a voluntary body sue for bonded labourers. A letter could be treated as a writ; continuing mandamus kept administrations under watch. The Court is unusually interventionist on appointments and social rights. It is not the world’s most powerful if power means being always obeyed. Frivolous PIL should shrink; voiceless litigants have not vanished because GDP rose.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.