On The Supreme Court's Appointment Frenzy

There have been Supreme Court nominations for over two years, yet there are still a few openings. As a result, it is possible that the two branches may begin to agree more and faster on the Collegium's recommendations as a result of recent appointments. With 33 judges on the bench, the court's sanctioned complement of 34 judges is exceeded. An encouraging sign is the fact that there are three women on the bench and that diverse High Courts are represented. Because of the timing of her elevation, Justice B.V. Nagarathna may become the first woman Chief Justice of India (CJI). P.S. Narasimha, a former Additional Solicitor-General and future Chief Justice, follows the tradition of appointing members of the bar straight to the Supreme Court.

 Chief Justice Akil Kureshi of the Tripura High Court, who ranks high on the all-India seniority list of High Court justices, is one prominent contender who is not on the list. In light of Justice Rohinton Nariman's retirement and a change in the membership of the Collegium, it's possible that these names were reached through compromise. Speculating that Justice Kureshi's nomination may have stalled the appointment process for a lengthy period is not unfounded. Justice Kureshi's nomination as Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court was rescinded two years ago because it did not meet the Centre's needs. Tripura High Court eventually appointed him as a judge. However, it must not become a habit to exclude qualified applicants without good reason merely to appease the executive's objections. Only by believing that it protects against executive involvement does the opaque collegium system remain in place. It's vital to keep in mind why we're all here in the first place. There should be less deadlock in the selection of judges in the future, as well as more attention to socioeconomic and geographical representation.