Judicial Appointments Primacy: S. P. Gupta Judgement

The question asks to identify the specific Supreme Court judgement associated with the principle of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the Collegium of Judges holding primary importance in appointing and transferring judges to the higher judiciary.

Significance of S. P. Gupta vs. President of India

The case S. P. Gupta vs. President of India (1981), often called the First Judges Case, is relevant to the discussion of judicial appointments. In this judgement, the Supreme Court examined the role of the CJI's opinion versus the executive's power. The court stated that the CJI's advice regarding appointments was not binding on the government.

While this case did not establish the strong primacy of the Collegium that evolved later, it critically analyzed the interaction between the executive and the judiciary concerning appointments and transfers, forming a basis for subsequent legal evolution on the matter.

Analysis of Other Options

• Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973): This landmark case established the 'Basic Structure doctrine' of the Constitution, which limits the scope of Parliament's amending powers. It did not primarily concern judicial appointments.
• Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978): This judgement significantly interpreted Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty), stating that any law depriving a person of their life or liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable. It focused on fundamental rights, not judicial appointments.
• S. R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994): This case dealt with the constitutional validity of the President's Rule imposed under Article 356, focusing on federalism and the limits of executive power over state governments.