The Distinguished Jurist Provision: Article 124(3)(c)
Polity · Tuesday, 1 September 2026
Article 124(3)(c) of the Constitution allows the President to appoint a 'distinguished jurist' as a Supreme Court judge. Despite being in force for 76 years, this provision remains a 'dead letter' as no such appointment has ever been made.
Quick highlights
- Article 124(3)(c) defines eligibility for Supreme Court judgeship.
- A distinguished jurist needs no prior High Court or Bar experience.
- Provision was proposed by H. V. Kamath and supported by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar.
- The 42nd Amendment briefly added this to High Courts, but it was later repealed.
- Bar Council regulations currently divide legal academia from active practice.
Context
Supreme Court Judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted this unused mandate, urging the legal community to consider the potential of academic scholars on the apex court bench.
Key Features
Eligibility is based on the 'opinion of the President', now filtered through the Supreme Court Collegium. It targets eminent legal scholars, authors, or researchers of exceptional repute.
Remember this
- Article 124(3)(c) applies only to the Supreme Court.
- The 44th Amendment (1978) removed the 'distinguished jurist' clause for High Courts.
- Kamath cited the practice of the ICJ as a model for this provision.
- Not a single distinguished jurist has been appointed to the SC since 1950.