Can Jurists Be Appointed as Supreme Court Judges?
The provision allowing 'distinguished jurists' to be appointed as Supreme Court judges under Article 124(3) has remained unused for over 76 years. Despite intentions to bring professional diversity and eminent legal scholars into the judiciary, Supreme Court appointments have overwhelmingly favored High Court judges and Bar elevations. Critics point to practical challenges, including lack of courtroom experience among academics, procedural hurdles in the Collegium system, and the absence of clear definitions for a 'distinguished jurist'. Reviving this pathway could enhance the intellectual depth of the judiciary.
Key Points
- Article 124(3) of the Constitution permits the appointment of a 'distinguished jurist' as an SC judge.
- The provision has never been invoked since the Constitution was adopted in 1950.
- Challenges include lack of courtroom experience, procedural hurdles, and reluctance of the Collegium.
- Reviving this pathway could bring greater diversity and academic expertise to the apex court.
Exam Facts
- Article 124(3) outlines the three routes for qualification to be appointed as a Supreme Court judge.
- Professor Shibban Lal Saksena proposed the distinguished jurist provision on June 7, 1949.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.