The Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, AS Oka, and Vikram Nath expressed concern about the Centre splitting up collegium recommendations in its order in the contempt petition filed against the Central Government over the delay in finalising judicial appointments. Furthermore, the Court has asked the Centre to address the issue, as the collegium's intended seniority is jeopardised when the Centre chooses some names while rejecting others submitted in the same resolution.

"Another aspect which has been emphasized before us is that when the recommendations are cleared by the Supreme Court, the seniority set out therein must be followed as it gives rise to necessary hard burns. This issue has also been flagged by Mr. Prashant Bhushan in IA No.5673/2022. in WP (Criminal) No. 895 of 2018. This is another aspect the Government must address itself to". "Sometimes when you appoint, you pick up some names from the list and not others. What you do is you effectively disrupt the seniority. When the Supreme Court collegium makes the recommendation, many factors are kept in mind.

The proposal to transfer Justice S Muralidhar as Chief Justice of Madras High Court is a recent example of the Centre breaking up the collegium resolution. On September 28, the Supreme Court collegium passed a resolution transferring Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Dr. S Muralidhar from the J&K&L High Court and the Orissa High Court, respectively, to the Rajasthan and Madras High Courts. However, on October 11, the Department of Justice only notified the transfer of Justice Mithal, ignoring the proposal made in the same collegium resolution regarding Justice Muralidhar.

Case Title: Advocates Association Bengaluru v. Barun Mitra And Anr. 
Citation: Contempt Petition (C) No. 867/2021 in TP(C) No. 2419/2019