All in the family: Women, scheduled castes, tribes, OBCs a small fraction of Supreme Court judges; 6% relatives

New Delhi: Only 3.6% of the Supreme Court's nominees for the position of judges of various high courts since November 2022 were from scheduled castes and even fewer from scheduled tribes, according to disclosures made by the apex court.

Data disclosed by the court on Monday night showed its collegium suggested 221 names to be high court judges. Of these, 8 belonged to scheduled castes and just 7 to scheduled tribes. To be sure, some of these 221 names are yet to be appointed by the central government.

Other backward castes or OBCs fared better at about 14.5% or 32 nominees while women came in at 15.3%, or 34 nominees.

Also Read | Games24x7 lays off staff as Supreme Court hears 28% GST case

A total of 124 persons, named by the top court’s collegium, belonged to the general category, but were not women, or minorities, making up about 56% of the nominees.

The Supreme Court did not give a reason for putting out the press release, but said it was for "knowledge and awareness of the public”.

The SC provided the data in two parts—from 9 November 2022 to 10 November 2024, and 11 November 2024 onwards till date—marking the tenures of India’s last two chief justices.

Outgoing chief justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna took oath for his current office on 11 November, where he also took charge of the Supreme Court collegium. He is set to retire from office on 14 May.

Also Read | Prolonged uncertainty awaits JSW Steel after court quashes BPSL resolution plan

Former chief justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud headed the top court from 9 November 2022 to 10 November 2024.

Both these chief justices are related to former judiciary members. Chandrachud is the son of Justice Yeshwant Chandrachud, who was chief justice from February 1978 to 1985.

Khanna is the son and nephew of renowned judges. His father, Dev Raj Khanna, was a Delhi High Court judge, and his uncle, Hans Raj Khanna, was a notable Supreme Court judge.

Also Read | How rich are Supreme Court judges in India? Assets worth crores at glance

The SC data that was disclosed a week before the retirement of Khanna showed that about 6% of the judges nominated for these roles were related to other judges.

Some of the judges nominated by the Supreme Court Collegium are yet to be formally appointed by the central government. 

“The Supreme Court of India has placed the complete process of appointments to the High Courts and Supreme Court including the role assigned to the High Court Collegium, the role and inputs received from the State Governments, Government of India, and consideration by the Supreme Court Collegium, on its website for knowledge and awareness of the public,” a Supreme Court press release dated 5 May said. 

The apex court’s collegium has, on multiple occasions, nominated candidates belonging to minorities or marginalized communities to the higher judiciary. For instance, in July 2024, the collegium elevated Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, who belongs to Manipur, to the Supreme Court, saying his elevation to the top court would provide representation to India’s north-eastern region.

Additionally, chief justice-designate B.R. Gavai, who belongs to a scheduled caste, was also elevated to the Supreme Court in 2019.

The top court’s disclosure comes in the backdrop of the union cabinet approving the enumeration of castes in the upcoming Census. The union cabinet and the cabinet committee on political affairs chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 30 April decided that caste enumeration should be included in the main census instead of being conducted as a separate survey.

The SC’s data also showed that a little over half the recommendations (52.9%) for the positions of High Court judges came from the Bar, indicating advocates-turned-judges are in a majority. Alternatively, the collegium can also recommend names of already-serving judges from district courts for the position of High Court judges.

There is no identity-based reservation in the Supreme Court, said Hemant Gupta, a former Supreme Court judge and current chairperson of the India International Arbitration Centre. "The Supreme Court Collegium makes nominations for the position of a High Court judge based on merit alone, a person's gender or caste identity should not play any role in the same," he told Mint.

Former Supreme Court judge and Collegium member Sanjay Kishan Kaul said, “The data indicates that the pace of appointments has risen over the last few months.” However, he added that the data does not show how many recommendations from high courts and state governments are pending with the central government.

Recommendations have to be sent to the central government, which then sends the list of recommendations to the collegium. After this, the collegium sends its recommendations back to the central government for appointment.

Kaul also pointed out that some appointments, as seen in the data disclosed, have been pending for at least a year. These delays can make the nominees feel like they are "detained", he said, adding this may discourage future lawyers from giving consent to be considered for elevation to the higher judiciary.

Given that at least half of all HC judges are drawn from the Bar, the data shows that “those with more privilege and connection are likely to survive longer in the profession and even be considered for elevation to the HC,” said Alok Prasanna, co-founder, Vidhi Center for Legal Policy.

District judiciary is diverse due to reservation in every state, said Prasanna, but district judges are not elevated often enough or for long enough for their diversity to reflect in the High Court.

As a result, representation in High Courts becomes a pipeline problem, said Prasanna. “If you don't have a Bar which rewards merit, or do not elevate enough judges from the district judiciary, the HC will continue to be dominated by hitherto privileged castes and communities,” he said.

The collegium’s disclosure also comes amid a capacity crunch in high courts, where about a third of the posts are vacant. Data from the department of justice showed that there were 1,122 positions as judges in high courts and the Supreme Court. Of these, 354—about 31.5%—were vacant as on 30 April 2025.