In Brief
Shanti Bhushan, a senior advocate, petitioned the Supreme Court seeking a declaration that the Chief Justice's power to allocate cases and constitute benches (the "Master of Roster" function) should be exercised by a collegium of five senior judges, not by the Chief Justice individually. He relied on principles from the Second and Third Judges' cases—which read "Chief Justice" as collegium in the context of judicial appointments—to argue for collective decision-making in roster allocation. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the Chief Justice, in his individual capacity, must retain exclusive power over roster and bench allocation for efficient court functioning. While the collegium interpretation applies to appointments under Article 124 for specific constitutional reasons, it cannot be extended to roster powers under Article 145, which require swift daily administration. The Court affirmed that this power must be exercised lawfully, in accordance with applicable rules and conventions, but remains the Chief Justice's individual prerogative.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.