The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the elevation of three sitting High Court Chief Justices as judges of the Supreme Court. The recommendation, made by the five-senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, follows the collegium system established through the Three Judges Cases. The names now move to the government for formal appointment. This development is significant for judicial appointments and the ongoing debate around the collegium's role in shaping the composition of India's apex court.

The collegium system governs judicial appointments to the Supreme Court and High Courts in India. It is not found in the Constitution's text but was judicially crafted through three landmark Supreme Court decisions collectively called the Three Judges Cases.

First Judges Case (S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981): The Supreme Court held that the Chief Justice of India's opinion on judicial appointments was not binding on the executive, giving primacy to the government.

Second Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993): The Court reversed the First Judges Case and held that the 'opinion' of the CJI — formed in consultation with the two senior-most judges — was binding. This established the collegium system.

Third Judges Case (In re: Special Reference 1 of 1998): On a Presidential Reference, the Court expanded the collegium to the CJI plus the four senior-most puisne judges of the Supreme Court. This is the current binding position.

For elevation to the Supreme Court, Article 124(2) of the Constitution requires the President to appoint judges 'after consultation' with the CJI and such other judges as the President thinks necessary. The collegium's interpretation renders this 'consultation' effectively binding. The government can return a recommendation once, but if the collegium reiterates it, the appointment must be made.

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), enacted by the 99th Constitutional Amendment (2014), sought to replace the collegium with a statutory body but was struck down in 2015 (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India) as unconstitutional for violating judicial independence, a basic structure element.