New Delhi: Justice B.V. Nagarathna, one of the five judges on the Supreme Court collegium, has recorded her dissent in the recommendation of the elevation of Patna high court chief justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi as judge of the top court, The Indian Express reported.The five-member collegium, comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath and J.K. Maheshwari, besides Nagarathna, made a 4-1 split decision on Justice Pancholi, with the lone woman judge in the top court issuing a rare detailed dissent regarding his elevation.According to Express, Nagarathna opposed the recommendation citing his overall seniority and regional representation. Justice Pancholi currently ranks 57th in the all-India list of seniority of high court judges.“The Supreme Court has routinely underlined three factors as its selection criteria – the combined seniority on an all-India basis of Chief Justices and Judges of High Courts, the principle of representation, and ‘merit and integrity’,” the report states.Nagarathna’s concerns, according to the report, were about recommending one more judge from the Gujarat high court, less than three months after Justice N.V, Anjaria (also from Gujarat HC) was appointed to the top court. Justice Pancholi was transferred to Patna high court on July 24, 2023, after nearly two decades in the Gujarat high court.In May, when Justice Pancholi’s candidature had first come up for discussion, at least two judges in the collegium had reportedly expressed concerns on his lack of seniority. To address the concerns on seniority, the collegium reportedly instead recommended Justice Anjaria to the top court, while Justice Pancholi was appointed the Chief Justice of the Patna HC. This was cleared by Union government on July 14, 2025.According to a Hindustan Times report, Justice Nagarathna believed Pancholi’s recommendation was shelved, and thus underscored her surprise when it re-emerged within three months. This prompted her to issue a written dissent, as the recommendation would mean bypassing the seniority of not just Justice Anjaria but also other senior judges of the Gujarat high court. She is also said to have raised questions regarding the over-representation of Gujarat high court in the SC.Her note, according to the HT report, warned that advancing Justice Pancholi despite these concerns would be counter-productive to the administration of justice and would place at risk “whatever credibility the collegium system still holds”. The note also underscored that choices taken now will carry long-term ramifications for how the court is administered and perceived.The recommendation of Justice Pancholi and Anjaria had come up to ensure that the Gujarat high court continued to be representated in the Supreme Court, after Justices MR Shah and Bela Trivedi retirements in May and June this year, which left Justice Pardiwala as the lone judge representing the western state.The Supreme Court has a sanctioned strength of 34 judges, and each high court is taken into consideration for adequate regional representation. There are also three judges each from the Bombay, Allahabad and the Punjab and Haryana high courts.However, it is the under-representation of other high courts in the apex court that Justice Nagarathna’s concerns appear to reflect.