Can a Distinguished Jurist Be Appointed as a Supreme Court Judge?

Gist Recently, Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted that the constitutional provision allowing a "distinguished jurist" to be elevated directly to the apex court has not been utilized in over 76 years. While the framers included this route to diversify the Bench with eminent legal scholars, practical hurdles and the existing appointment mechanisms have kept it dormant. Aspirants must understand this constitutional dead-letter to grasp the nuances of judicial appointments, the evolution of the collegium system, and the ongoing debate surrounding judicial diversity. Background Under Article 124 3 of the Constitution, a person can be appointed as a Supreme Court judge through three avenues: serving as a High Court judge for at least five years , practicing as a High Court advocate for at least 10 years , or being a "distinguished jurist" in the opinion of the President. The Constitution deliberately does not define the term "distinguished jurist" nor does it prescribe a minimum tenure of professional experience for this category. In practice, appointments are driven by the Supreme Court Collegium , which has historically preferred elevating sitting…