The Supreme Court Collegium’s move to elevate Patna HC Chief Justice Vipul Pancholi saw dissent from Justice B.V. Nagarathna. She flagged concerns over seniority and regional representation in appointments.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the elevation of Patna High Court Chief Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi as a judge of the Supreme Court of India. If the Central government approves, Justice Pancholi is set to have a long and distinguished tenure at the apex court, shaping Indian jurisprudence for nearly a decade.
Justice Pancholi, currently serving as Chief Justice of Patna High Court, is projected to serve an eight-year tenure at the Supreme Court, one of the longest in recent times.
Notably, he is expected to become the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in October 2031, following the retirement of Justice Joymalya Bagchi. His tenure as CJI is anticipated to last over one and a half years, giving him a crucial role in influencing key legal decisions.
If appointed, Justice Pancholi will be the third sitting Supreme Court judge from the Gujarat High Court, joining Justices JB Pardiwala and NV Anjaria. Justice Pardiwala is slated to serve as CJI from May 2028 to August 2030, reflecting the consistent representation of Gujarat High Court judges in the Supreme Court.
Born on May 28, 1968, Justice Pancholi joined the Bar in September 1991 and began practicing at the Gujarat High Court.
He was elevated as an additional judge on October 1, 2014, confirmed as permanent judge on June 10, 2016, and transferred to the Patna High Court in July 2023, where he served as Chief Justice.
If confirmed, he will serve until May 27, 2033, retiring as CJI, promising continuity, stability, and significant contributions to India’s legal framework.
The Collegium has also recommended the elevation of Justice Alok Aradhe, Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, alongside Justice Pancholi.
It is further learnt that Justice Nagarathna referred to the circumstances surrounding Justice Pancholi’s transfer from the Gujarat High Court to the Patna High Court.
She reportedly asked the collegium to review the confidential minutes of this transfer to verify whether the process was conducted according to established procedure. Her note also requested that the dissent be uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website.
Justice Nagarathna is in line to become the first female Chief Justice of India in 2027, with a tenure of 36 days. Her intervention is therefore seen as particularly significant, as it reflects both institutional and representational concerns.
Justice Pancholi’s own judicial journey began on October 1, 2014, when he was elevated as an Additional Judge of the Gujarat High Court.
He became a permanent Judge on June 10, 2016, and after nearly a decade in Gujarat, was transferred to the Patna High Court on July 24, 2023. On July 21, 2025, he was sworn in as the Chief Justice of Patna High Court after the central government cleared the collegium’s recommendation.
If Justice Pancholi’s elevation is cleared, he is in line to become the Chief Justice of India in October 2031, serving for over a year and a half. This would make him the third sitting Supreme Court judge from Gujarat High Court, alongside Justices J.B. Pardiwala and N.V. Anjaria.
Dissent in judicial appointments is not new. In 2011, former Supreme Court judge Justice Ruma Pal famously described the appointments process as “possibly the best kept secret of this country.”
Justice Jasti Chelameswar, in his 2015 dissent on the NJAC verdict, went a step further by refusing to attend collegium meetings, citing lack of transparency. His move eventually pushed the collegium to start publishing its resolutions online, adding a layer of accountability.
Similarly, during Chief Justice S.A. Bobde’s tenure, a deadlock within the collegium from 2019 to 2021 delayed several key appointments to the Supreme Court.
The debate over seniority also ties into the issue of gender representation in the higher judiciary. Since 1950, the Supreme Court has seen only 11 women judges, amounting to roughly 4% of its total strength over time. Currently, Justice B.V. Nagarathna is the only woman on the bench, underscoring the gender imbalance in India’s apex court.
Collegium Decision and Dissent
The Supreme Court Collegium’s decision to recommend Justice Pancholi was not unanimous. Justice B V Nagarathna, one of the five judges in the Collegium, recorded a dissent, citing concerns regarding his overall seniority and regional representation. Justice Pancholi currently ranks 57th in the All-India List of Seniority of High Court judges.
The Collegium includes CJI Bhushan R Gavai, and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, JK Maheshwari, and BV Nagarathna.
The Supreme Court has routinely emphasized three main selection criteria:
“the combined seniority on an all-India basis of Chief Justices and Judges of High Courts,” “representation,” and “merit and integrity.”
These factors are usually balanced to recommend a High Court judge for appointment. Seniority may sometimes be bypassed, particularly for candidates likely to become CJI, to maintain the line of succession.
Seniority and Regional Representation Concerns
Sources indicated that Justice Nagarathna’s concerns focused on recommending one more judge from the Gujarat High Court, less than three months after Justice NV Anjaria from the same High Court was appointed to the Supreme Court.
“In May, when Justice Pancholi’s candidature first came up for discussion, at least two judges in the Collegium had expressed concerns on his lack of seniority,” sources said. Recommending him at that time would have bypassed those senior to him at Gujarat High Court, including Justice Anjaria.
To address seniority concerns, the Collegium had previously recommended Justice Anjaria, and Justice Pancholi was appointed Chief Justice of Patna High Court. When his name came up again, Justice Nagarathna reportedly raised questions regarding the over-representation of Gujarat High Court judges in the Supreme Court.
If appointed, the Supreme Court would have three judges from Gujarat High Court – Justices JB Pardiwala, Anjaria, and Pancholi. Both Justices Pardiwala and Pancholi would be in the line of succession as Chief Justices of India in 2028 for two years and 2031 for seven months, respectively.
Supreme Court Representation by State
| High Court | Judges in SC |
|---|---|
| Allahabad | Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra |
| Andhra Pradesh | Sarasa Venkatanaryana Bhatti |
| Bombay | Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale, Atul Sharachchandra Chandurkar |
| Calcutta | Dipankar Datta, Joymalya Bagchi |
| Chhattisgarh | Prashant Kumar Mishra |
| Delhi | Manmohan |
| Gauhati | Ujjal Bhuyan |
| Gujarat | Jamshed Burjor Pardiwala, Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria |
| Himachal Pradesh | Sanjay Karol |
| Karnataka | B.V. Nagarathna, Aravind Kumar |
| Kerala | Krishnan Vinod Chandran |
| Madhya Pradesh | Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari, Satish Chandra Sharma |
| Madras | M.M. Sundresh, R. Mahadevan |
| Manipur | Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh |
| Patna | Ahsanuddin Amanullah |
| Punjab & Haryana | Surya Kant, Rajesh Bindal, Augustine George Masih |
| Rajasthan | Sandeep Mehta, Vijay Bishnoi |
| Telangana | P.V. San |
Sanctioned Strength of High Courts and Regional Balance
| No. | High Court | Sanctioned Strength |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Allahabad | 160 |
| 2 | Bombay | 94 |
| 3 | Madras | 75 |
| 4 | Calcutta | 72 |
| 5 | Punjab & Haryana | 85 |
| 6 | Madhya Pradesh | 53 |
| 7 | Patna | 53 |
| 8 | Gujarat | 53 |
| 9 | Rajasthan | 50 |
| 10 | Delhi | 60 |
| 11 | Karnataka | 62 |
| 12 | Orissa | 33 |
| 13 | Telangana | 42 |
| 14 | Jharkhand | 25 |
| 15 | J & K and Ladakh | 25 |
| 16 | Chhattisgarh | 22 |
| 17 | Gauhati | 32 |
| 18 | Andhra Pradesh | 37 |
| 19 | Kerala | 47 |
| 20 | Himachal Pradesh | 17 |
| 21 | Tripura | 5 |
| 22 | Uttarakhand | 11 |
| 23 | Sikkim | 3 |
| 24 | Manipur | 5 |
| 25 | Meghalaya | 4 |
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Supreme Court Collegium
