UPSC Mains 2017 GS Paper 2 Q2: model answer
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.
What the question wants
Critically examine the Supreme Court's 2015 decision striking down the NJAC and its meaning for higher judicial appointments.
How to structure it
Critically examine: what the NJAC was, why it fell, arguments for and against the verdict, and what remains.
- NJAC
- The verdict
- Criticism
- Way forward
How to think it through
The Court judged its own appointments. That is the irony, and examiners like you to name it fairly. Imagine a cricket board deciding a case about who picks the cricket board.
Model answer
In 2014 Parliament passed the 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act almost unanimously. In October 2015 a five-judge bench struck both down by 4:1 in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v Union.
The NJAC
Six members: the CJI, two senior judges, the Law Minister and two eminent persons chosen by a panel including the PM and the Leader of Opposition. Any two members could veto a name.
The verdict
- Primacy of the judiciary in appointments is part of judicial independence, a basic feature.
- The Law Minister's presence and the two-member veto could let the executive block judges.
- Justice Chelameswar dissented, calling the collegium opaque.
Criticism
- Judges choosing judges lacks accountability.
- It overrode a near-unanimous Parliament and 20 State Assemblies.
- The Court itself admitted the collegium needs reform, yet the Memorandum of Procedure is still not finalised.
Way forward
A transparent collegium with published criteria, a secretariat and fixed timelines, as the Court began in 2023 by uploading reasons. The collegium survived the NJAC; it must now earn the trust the NJAC was meant to deliver.
Draw: Two panels: NJAC composition vs collegium, with veto power shown.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
99th Amendment 2014, NJAC Act, SCAORA 2015, 4:1, Chelameswar dissent, primacy of judiciary, basic structure, Memorandum of Procedure.
Where most answers lose marks
- Saying the NJAC was struck down for including the PM. The PM was not a member; the Law Minister was.
Related Mains PYQs
- What is meant by judicial legislation? In this context, discuss the verdicts of the apex court allowing “passive euthanasia” and a “living… UPSC 2026 · GS-II
- Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
- Compare and contrast the President’s power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
- “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike... .” In view of… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
Fresh examples from current affairs
‘Sentencing shall not be a lottery’: why India needs a Sentencing Council and guidelines
In India, two people convicted of the same crime can get very different punishments depending on which judge hears the case. An Indian Express ‘Experts Explain’ piece on 24 October 2026 argues for a Sentencing Council with guidelines, pointing to the Supreme Court’s words in Sunita Devi v. State of Bihar (2024) that ‘sentencing shall not be a mere lottery’. The Centre has asked the Law Commission to examine a national sentencing policy. This topic connects Articles 14 and 21 with criminal justice reform.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Probation of Offenders Act 1958, BNSS hearing on sentence, Concurrent List. · Mains GS-II: judicial reforms, criminal justice.
24 Oct 2026
Supreme Court: no prior approval under Section 17A needed to probe a bribe demand
In a judgment of 16 October 2026, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria held that investigating a bribe demand by a public servant does not need prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Asking for a bribe, the court said, is not part of discharging official duties.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Sections 7, 7A, 17A and 19 of the PC Act. · Mains GS-II/GS-IV: honest officers versus accountability.
19 Oct 2026
CJI Surya Kant inaugurates the first permanent High Court bench in Leh
On 18 October 2026 Chief Justice of India Surya Kant inaugurated a permanent bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh in Leh. Until now, a person in Ladakh who wanted to file a writ petition had to travel to Srinagar or Jammu, across high passes and harsh winters. The bench was made possible by a regulation that the President promulgated on 27 August and that came into force on 5 September. It is a simple idea with a big effect: bring the court to the people.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Arts. 214, 231, 241, 226, 39A; common High Court. · Mains GS-II: access to justice, judicial infrastructure.
18 Oct 2026
Three High Court Chief Justices appointed as Supreme Court judges
On 5 October 2026 the President appointed three High Court Chief Justices as judges of the Supreme Court: Justice Sunita Agarwal (Gujarat), Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya (Delhi) and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh (Telangana). The first two have Allahabad as their parent High Court and the third Jharkhand.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Article 124. · Mains GS-II: judicial appointments.
5 Oct 2026Learn the concept
Question text as printed in the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) question paper. The model answer is original Battle IAS work; use it to learn structure, not to memorise.
Want every PYQ in one place? See the Battle IAS PYQ Book.