Supreme Court, Judicial appointments 
Litigation Columns

Collegium resolution of August 17 recommends persons from 9 states, 6 communities as Supreme Court judges

This is also the first time three women are being recommended together for appointment to the Supreme Court in one go.

Bar & Bench

The Supreme Court Collegium resolution of August 17 recommending names of nine persons for appointment as apex court judges is noteworthy for its pan-India representation and diversity in choice.

The resolution has come more than two years after the last resolution was passed on August 28, 2019, when the Collegium had recommended four judges for appointment to the top court.

This is the first time a resolution has been passed recommending nine persons for appointment to the top court in one go.

Interestingly, this is also the first time three women are being recommended together for appointment to the Supreme Court in one go.

The resolution has names from different communities and States.

All the nine are from nine different states – Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and Gujarat.

While four of them belong to the Brahmin community, the remaining 5 are from Scheduled Caste, Other Backward Class, Baniya, Khatri and Kayastha communities.

8 Judges and 1 Senior Advocate recommended to Supreme Court

Justice CT Ravikumar - Scheduled Caste community, Kerala

Justice MM Sundresh - Other Backward Class, Tamil Nadu

Justice Hima Kohli – Khatri, Delhi

Justice Vikram Nath – Kayastha, Uttar Pradesh

Justice JK Maheshwari – Baniya, Madhya Pradesh

Justices BV Nagarathna – Brahmin, Karnataka

Justice Bela Trivedi – Brahmin, Gujarat

Justice AS Oka – Brahmin, Maharashtra

Senior Advocate PS Narasimha - Brahmin, Andhra Pradesh.

Bail cannot be denied merely because bail petition is bulky or voluminous: Delhi High Court

Apply early to JGLS: Secure scholarships and retest eligibility be:fore Feb 28 deadline

Insurance company cannot use concealed exclusion clause to defeat consumer claim: J&K High Court

Which court can extend arbitral timeline under Section 29A of Arbitration Act? Supreme Court answers

RTI not meant to micro-manage government; no need for standalone AI law for now: Economic Survey of India

SCROLL FOR NEXT