Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system on appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA.
This question is available to read here. The practice button generates a fresh question from the same paper. Here, practise an answer plan in keywords. Choose your timer on the next screen. Feedback uses our common 15-point practice rubric, rather than the paper’s original mark allocation.
On September 27, 2026, the Supreme Court engaged in crucial hearings regarding legal challenges to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019. In a notable divergence of administrative stances, the Andhra Pradesh government submitted an affidavit stating it played no role in the enactment of the central legislation and maintained that it has not engaged in any discriminatory practices against transgender persons. Conversely, the Uttarakhand government defended the Act, asserting that the existing framework is beneficial for the community and sufficient to address their welfare needs. This judicial discourse highlights the complex interplay between central legislative mandates, state-level implementation, and the overarching constitutional protections for vulnerable groups.
In a significant legal intervention addressing the statutory protections of gender minorities, the Supreme Court asserted that subsequent amendments or alterations to transgender laws cannot strip away rights and identity recognitions already conferred upon individuals. Responding to petitions urging protection against the arbitrary cancellation of transgender identity cards, the apex court reinforced the doctrine of non-retrogression, emphasizing that state actions must uphold dignity, legal certainty, and fundamental constitutional guarantees established under landmark jurisprudence.
The Supreme Court has issued notice on a plea filed by Pranit More seeking to club multiple First Information Reports registered across different states, notably Maharashtra and Haryana, in connection with the viral '₹370 biriyani' controversy. A three-judge Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India sought responses from the Union government and the respective state authorities. This case highlights recurring legal debates surrounding the multiplicity of proceedings, forum shopping, and the protection of fundamental freedoms against retaliatory or harassing criminal prosecutions.