UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — If judges lose credibility, nothing will be left of judiciary: Justice Bhuyan
Q1. With reference to the constitutional architecture governing appointment and transfer of judges of the higher judiciary in India, consider the following:
1. Article 124 — appointment of judges of the Supreme Court
2. Article 217 — appointment of judges of the High Courts
3. Article 222 — transfer of judges from one High Court to another
4. Article 226 — transfer of judges of the Supreme Court
Which of the above is/are correctly identified?
- Article 124 — appointment of judges of the Supreme Court
- Article 217 — appointment of judges of the High Courts
- Article 222 — transfer of judges from one High Court to another
- Article 226 — transfer of judges of the Supreme Court
- A. 1 and 2 only
- B. 3 and 4 only
- C. 1, 2 and 3 only
- D. 1, 2, 3 and 4
Q2. As per the principles laid down in the Third Judges Case (1998), the Supreme Court Collegium for the appointment of judges of the Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India together with how many of the next senior-most judges of the Supreme Court?
- A. Two
- B. Three
- C. Four
- D. Six
Q3. In the context of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan's 2026 remarks on the Supreme Court Collegium's resolution of October 14, 2025, the expression 'reconsideration sought by the government' as it appeared in the collegium minutes is best described as:
- A. A statutory power of the Union Government under the Memorandum of Procedure to formally veto a collegium recommendation on judicial transfers
- B. The constitutional power of the President under Article 222 to refer a transfer recommendation back to the collegium, exercisable once
- C. An informal executive request to the collegium to revisit a transfer recommendation, having no constitutional basis and viewed by critics as executive influence over a judicial function
- D. A power of Parliament under Article 124(4) to seek review of judicial transfers in the public interest
Q4. Which one of the following Supreme Court judgments is regarded as the seminal decision that originated the present Collegium System for appointment of judges of the higher judiciary in India?
- A. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) — the First Judges Case
- B. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1993) — the Second Judges Case
- C. In re: Special Reference 1 of 1998 — the Third Judges Case
- D. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015) — the NJAC judgment
Q5. With reference to the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) as compared with the Collegium System it sought to replace, consider the following statements:
1. Unlike the collegium, the NJAC was created by a Constitutional Amendment (the 99th Amendment Act, 2014) and would have replaced the collegium for appointments and transfers in the higher judiciary.
2. The NJAC was to be a six-member body comprising the Chief Justice of India as chairperson, the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, the Union Minister of Law and Justice, and two eminent persons.
3. The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 was struck down by a unanimous five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 2015 on the ground that it violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- Unlike the collegium, the NJAC was created by a Constitutional Amendment (the 99th Amendment Act, 2014) and would have replaced the collegium for appointments and transfers in the higher judiciary.
- The NJAC was to be a six-member body comprising the Chief Justice of India as chairperson, the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, the Union Minister of Law and Justice, and two eminent persons.
- The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 was struck down by a unanimous five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 2015 on the ground that it violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
- A. 1 and 2 only
- B. 2 and 3 only
- C. 1 and 3 only
- D. 1, 2 and 3