Adjustment of Judicial Strength and Collegium Composition within the Supreme Court of India.
印度最高法院司法人力與合議庭組成之調整
Introduction
The Supreme Court of India is currently managing fluctuations in its judicial strength following a legislative increase in sanctioned capacity and the retirement of several justices.
印度最高法院目前正處理司法人力的波動，這是由於立法增加核定員額以及數名法官退休所致。
Main Body
The institutional capacity of the Supreme Court has undergone a formal expansion. Pursuant to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance 2026, promulgated on May 16, the sanctioned strength was augmented from 34 to 38 judges, including the Chief Justice of India (CJI). This legislative mechanism was utilized to provide immediate effect to a Union Cabinet proposal approved on May 5, as Parliament was not in session. The administration asserted that this augmentation is requisite for the optimization of judicial efficiency and the acceleration of case resolution, particularly given that pendency reached a peak of 92,429 cases as of May 31, 2026.
最高法院的制度容量已進行正式擴充。根據 5 月 16 日頒布的《最高法院（法官人數）修正條例 2026》，核定員額從 34 位增加至 38 位法官，包括印度首席大法官 (CJI)。由於當時國會未開會，因此利用此立法機制以即時執行 5 月 5 日通過的聯邦內閣提案。行政部門主張，鑑於截至 2026 年 5 月 31 日，積壓案件達到 92,429 件的峰值，此次增員對於優化司法效率與加速案件解決至關重要。
Historically, the court's composition has evolved from eight judges in 1950 to the current sanctioned limit, with incremental increases occurring in 1956, 1960, 1977, 1986, 2009, and 2019. Despite the recent appointment of five judges on June 2—including Justices Sheel Nagu, Shree Chandrashekhar, Sanjeev Sachdeva, Arun Palli, and V. Mohana—the court currently maintains three vacancies. This deficit resulted from the retirements of Justice Pankaj Mithal on June 16 and Justice JK Maheshwari on June 28. Further vacancies are anticipated following the scheduled retirements of Justice Sanjay Karol on August 22 and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma on November 29.
從歷史來看，法院的組成從 1950 年的 8 位法官演變至目前的核定上限，並在 1956 年、1960 年、1977 年、1986 年、2009 年及 2019 年逐步增加。儘管 6 月 2 日新任命了 5 位法官——包括 Sheel Nagu、Shree Chandrashekhar、Sanjeev Sachdeva、Arun Palli 及 V. Mohana 法官——但法院目前仍有 3 個空缺。此缺口源於 Pankaj Mithal 法官於 6 月 16 日及 JK Maheshwari 法官於 6 月 28 日退休。隨著 Sanjay Karol 法官於 8 月 22 日及 Satish Chandra Sharma 法官於 11 月 29 日按計畫退休，預計將出現更多空缺。
Concomitant with these personnel changes is a shift in the Supreme Court Collegium. Following the departure of Justice Maheshwari, Justice P S Narasimha has ascended to the Collegium as the fifth senior-most judge. Justice Narasimha's professional trajectory includes service as a senior advocate, Additional Solicitor General of India in 2014, and a direct elevation from the Bar in 2021. The Collegium, established via judicial precedent in 1993, now comprises CJI Surya Kant and Justices Vikram Nath, B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, and P S Narasimha. This body retains the authority to recommend judicial appointments and transfers, though the executive branch maintains the prerogative to return such recommendations for reconsideration.
與這些人事變動同時發生的是最高法院合議庭的轉變。隨著 Maheshwari 法官離任，P S Narasimha 法官晉升至合議庭，成為第五位資深法官。Narasimha 法官的專業經歷包括擔任資深律師、2014 年擔任印度額外律政司，以及 2021 年由律師界直接獲任。合議庭於 1993 年根據司法先例成立，目前由首席大法官 Surya Kant 及 Vikram Nath、B V Nagarathna、M M Sundresh 與 P S Narasimha 法官組成。該機構保有推薦司法任命與調任的權限，儘管行政部門仍擁有將此類推薦退回重新考慮的特權。
Conclusion
The Supreme Court is presently operating with 35 judges against a sanctioned strength of 38, with the Collegium tasked with addressing current and imminent vacancies.
最高法院目前在核定員額 38 位的情況下，實際運作人數為 35 位法官，合議庭負責處理目前及即將出現的空缺。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of 'Formalism': Navigating High-Register Nominalization
To transition from B2 to C2, a student must move beyond describing actions and begin describing states of being and systemic processes. This text is a masterclass in Nominalization—the linguistic process of turning verbs (actions) into nouns (concepts). This shift transforms a narrative into an institutional record.
⚖️ The 'Action' vs. The 'Institution'
Compare these two ways of expressing the same reality:
- B2 Approach (Verbal/Narrative): The government increased the number of judges because they wanted to solve cases faster.
- C2 Approach (Nominal/Formal): *"This legislative mechanism was utilized to provide immediate effect to a Union Cabinet proposal... for the optimization of judicial efficiency."
In the C2 version, the focus is no longer on who is doing what, but on the mechanisms (the legislative mechanism, the proposal, the optimization). This creates an aura of objectivity and professional detachment essential for legal and diplomatic discourse.
🔍 Deconstructing the 'C2 Lexical Bridge'
Notice the strategic use of Latinate precision to replace common verbs:
| Common Verb | C2 Nominal/Formal Substitute | Contextual Nuance |
|---|---|---|
| Happen at the same time | Concomitant with | Suggests a systemic link, not just a coincidence. |
| Increase | Augmentation | Implies a formal, planned addition to a structure. |
| Start/Put into law | Promulgated | Specifically refers to the official proclamation of a law. |
| Move up | Ascended to | Denotes a formal rise in rank or hierarchy. |
🛠️ The Syntactic Pivot: The 'Prepositional Chain'
C2 mastery is evidenced by the ability to sustain long, complex noun phrases without losing grammatical coherence. Observe this chain:
"...the sanctioned strength was augmented from 34 to 38 judges, including the Chief Justice of India (CJI)."
Here, the subject is not a person, but "the sanctioned strength." By making an abstract concept the subject, the writer removes subjectivity.
Pro Tip for C2 Acquisition: Stop asking "What happened?" and start asking "What process occurred?" Instead of saying "The court is changing how it works," say "The institutional capacity of the court has undergone a formal expansion."