Centre clears 8 Collegium recommendations, all High Courts now have permanent Chief Justices

In a significant development for the Indian judiciary, the central government has approved all eight pending recommendations from the Supreme Court Collegium for the appointment of permanent Chief Justices to various High Courts. This decision brings to an end the unusual period of acting Chief Justices that had gripped multiple High Courts over the last two months, restoring stability to the upper echelons of the country’s higher judiciary.

The clearance, announced on July 20, 2026, comes after a phase of heightened judicial churn driven by the expansion of the Supreme Court’s strength and routine retirements. Legal professionals and court watchers had noted the unusual prevalence of acting Chief Justices, a situation that often leads to administrative uncertainty and delays in high-profile judicial decisions.

Background: The Supreme Court expansion and its ripple effects

The root cause of the sudden vacancies lay in the government’s decision to expand the Supreme Court’s sanctioned strength from 33 to 37 judges (excluding the Chief Justice of India). This was effected first through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026, and later through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 2026. As the news sources note: “The unusually large number of acting CJs over the last two months was largely the result of routine transfers, retirements, as well as a direct effect of the government's decision to expand the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength.”

The expansion created an immediate need for more judges at the apex level. In response, the Collegium elevated four High Court Chief Justices to the Supreme Court in a single round. This sudden elevation, while strengthening the Supreme Court, left their respective High Courts without a permanent head. As the sources explain: “The move led to four High Court Chief Justices being elevated to the Supreme Court in one go, resulting in sudden vacancies in the High Courts and consequent appointment of Acting CJs.”

Additionally, three other High Courts had been helmed by acting Chief Justices due to the regular retirement of their incumbent Chief Justices. Thus, by mid-July 2026, a total of seven High Courts were operating under acting Chief Justices, a number that was unusually high and raised concerns about judicial administration and case management.

Key developments: Government clears Collegium recommendations

The central government’s approval of the Collegium’s eight recommendations marks the culmination of a concerted effort to fill these vacancies. The clearance was widely anticipated after the Ministry of Law and Justice received the proposals from the Collegium, which had been expedited in light of the acting CJ situation.

While the specific names of the appointees and the High Courts they will lead have not been publicly detailed in the available sources, the news confirms that “all High Courts get permanent Chief Justices after Centre clears 8 Collegium recommendations.” This means that every High Court in the country now has a confirmed permanent Chief Justice, ending the temporary arrangements that had been in place.

The timing is critical. Acting Chief Justices, while constitutionally valid, often lack the full authority and tenure security that comes with a permanent appointment. Their ability to make long-term administrative changes, such as constituting larger benches or allocating sensitive cases, can be constrained. The restoration of permanent Chief Justices is expected to normalise the functioning of these courts.

Legal analysis: The Collegium system and government cooperation

This episode highlights the delicate balance between the judiciary and the executive in the appointment of higher judicial officers. The Collegium system, which has been the subject of much debate and litigation, requires the government to act on recommendations without undue delay. The unusually large number of acting Chief Justices had been a flashpoint, with some legal experts criticising the government for slow processing of recommendations.

However, the clearance of eight recommendations in one go signals a renewed cooperation between the two wings. The government’s decision to expand the Supreme Court’s strength—and subsequently expedite appointments—may be seen as part of a broader effort to address judicial vacancies across the country. The fact that the expansion was carried out through an ordinance and then an act underscores the urgency felt at the highest levels.

From a legal perspective, the appointments are made under Article 217 of the Constitution, which governs the appointment of High Court judges and Chief Justices. The role of the Collegium, as established by the Supreme Court’s judgments in the Second Judges Case (1993) and the Third Judges Case (1998), is to recommend names, while the government retains the power to object and seek reconsideration. In this instance, the government appears to have accepted all recommendations without reservation.

Impact on legal practice and the justice system

For practicing lawyers and litigants, the end of acting Chief Justices across all High Courts is a welcome development. Acting Chief Justices, by their very nature, hold office only until a permanent appointment is made. This often leads to a sense of temporary leadership, which can affect the morale of the court staff and the confidence of the bar.

With permanent Chief Justices in place, each High Court can now proceed with long-term planning, including the constitution of specialized benches, the assignment of case categories, and the implementation of e-court initiatives. The stability at the top is likely to improve case disposal rates and reduce the backlog that plagues many High Courts.

Moreover, the fact that the Supreme Court’s expansion was followed by swift elevation of four Chief Justices means that the apex court itself is now operating at its enhanced strength of 37 judges (plus the CJI). This should help in faster hearing of cases, especially those involving constitutional questions and appeals from High Courts.

Conclusion

The clearance of eight Collegium recommendations marks a turning point in the recent history of the Indian higher judiciary. What began as an unusual proliferation of acting Chief Justices—driven by an expansion of the Supreme Court and routine retirements—has now been resolved through executive action. All High Courts now have permanent Chief Justices, restoring administrative stability and reinforcing the institutional framework of the judiciary.

As the legal community absorbs this development, the focus will shift to how these new Chief Justices shape the functioning of their respective courts. For now, the system has demonstrated its capacity to adapt to sudden changes, thanks to the cooperative dynamic between the Collegium and the government. The episode serves as a reminder that the health of the judiciary depends not only on the calibre of its judges but also on timely and transparent appointments.