Bengaluru, May 7 -- In a landmark push for transparency, the Supreme Court , late on Monday night, made public detailed information on judges appointed to high courts by its Collegium between November 9, 2022, and May 5, 2025. The data, published on the apex court's website just days before Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna's retirement on May 14, includes details of caste, gender, faith of the appointees as also their familial links to serving or retired judges. The Collegium considered 406 candidates during this period, and recommended 221 appointments. In terms of appointees, of the 221, 34 were women, eight from the Scheduled Castes, seven from the Scheduled Tribes, and 39 from Other Backward Classes. Fourteen were related to judges of high courts and the Supreme Court. Twenty nine of these appointments are pending with the government. The court also released the process behind these appointments, including the roles played by high court collegiums, state governments, and the Union government. A version of the Memorandum of Procedure that guides the process was also uploaded for public reference. As of now, there is no plan to release data for recommendations concerning appointment as Supreme Court judges This move comes amid heightened scrutiny of the judiciary and follows the Supreme Court's April 2025 decision to publish statements of assets of all Supreme Court judges. Details of the assets of sitting Supreme Court judges were also published late Monday night. The disclosure also coincides with ongoing concerns about judicial probity, including a recent incident where a huge amount of money was allegedly recovered from a Delhi high court judge's residence, which is currently under judicial inquiry. The issue of judicial appointments by the Collegium has been a bone of contention between the legislature and the judiciary. Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution that deals with appointment of judges was exercised in the initial years after the adoption of Constitution by the political executive. But, with three successive judgments in the First Judges case (1981), Second Judges case (1993) and the Third Judges case (1998), the Supreme Court interpreted the word "consultation" occurring in Article 124 to mean a Collegium of CJI and top two judges for HC appointments, and CJI and top four judges for appointment of Supreme Court judges. In 2014, the Parliament brought radical reforms in the judge appointment process by amending the two Articles and introducing the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), that was to recommend names of judges to the President of India. A year later, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court struck down NJAC as unconstitutional as it impacted independence of judiciary, considered part of basic structure of the Constitution. Former Supreme Court judge justice Ajay Rastogi said the verdict is a positive step. "It is a positive step. If such information comes in public domain, people will talk about it and even criticise, and the judiciary can undertake course correction."...