The recent resolutions published by the SC Collegium have been making headlines as these are unprecedented instances by publicizing both the objections raised by the Central Govt. and its responses to them.

Because the Supreme Court Collegium has never before made the Central Government's concerns and its responses to them public, its most recent resolutions have generated significant media attention. The Collegium displayed admirable courage in pointing out several trivial and unacceptable grounds for opposition, including a candidate's sexual orientation, their social media posts, and their sharing of an article criticizing the Prime Minister.

Although the Court's courageous action, which came in the wake of many executive functionaries' constant verbal attacks over the past few weeks, has been warmly praised and applauded, there is one key element of the collegium resolution that has not received enough public attention.

The collegium reiterated Advocate John Sathyan's nomination for appointment as a Madras High Court judge, but they also added a highly significant and unique comment. He should be awarded seniority over the fresh names that were suggested for elevation as Madras High Court judges, according to the collegium's proposal.

The Supreme Court collegium first suggested the name Sathyan on February 16, 2022, along with five other names. Out of these six, the Center authorised the names of four individuals in two batches (two in March and the remaining two in June 2022), but John Sathyan and Abdul Ghani Abdul Hameed's names were not approved.

The Supreme Court Collegium, which was composed of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, and KM Joseph, reexamined the case of Sathyan on January 17, 2023, and rejected the two grounds for objection put forth by the Center—that he shared an article critical of the PM and that he criticised NEET in the wake of a student's suicide as well as the third ground.

The Collegium also submitted new recommendations for the promotion of five additional advocates on the same day (January 17). In light of this context, the Collegium amended the resolution to add a clause stating that Sathyan should have precedence over new suggestions.

"The Collegium further recommends that he be given precedence in the matter of appointment as Judge over certain names separately recommended today by this Collegium for appointment as Judges of the Madras High Court".

This is a commendable action by the Collegium because it makes sure the person, whose name the Center arbitrarily withheld, doesn't lose out on seniority. In this regard, it is important to remember the controversy over the seniority of Justice KM Joseph.

The Supreme Court collegium proposed again in July 2018 to promote Justice KM Joseph. The collegium also submitted two new nominations for Justices Indira Banerjee and Vineet Saran on the same day. However, the Central Government degraded Justice KM Joseph's seniority by two ranks when it issued the orders of appointment, placing him below Justices Banerjee and Saran.

It is also interesting that the Collegium recommended that the Centre process the other iterations Saurabh Kirpal, Somasekaran Sundaresan, Amitesh Banerjee, and Sakya Sen "expeditiously."