The framers of the constitution did not intend the judiciary to be superior to the Parliament and the executive but intended it to be on the sentinel of the qui vive if the other two limbs overstep the boundaries of their jurisdiction or omit to discharge their duties as public trustee.
Tyranny of the Unelected- Judicial overreach
The Appropriation of the executive and legislative powers by an authority primarily exercising the adjudicatory power without any checks and balances would be destructive of the basic feature of the democracy and dilutes the very essence of the democratic form of Governance.
Lack of Accountability
Every limb that wields power should be accountable, in the matters pertaining to the judicial appointments the accountability is neither with the judiciary nor with the executive.
Question of Public Interest
Public has ‘interest’ in the general administration of justice and the government is the elected trustee of the public interest. Therefor the government must be allowed a say in the appointments of judges. The say need not be final and determinative, but it is a very bad precedent that it has been reduced to a rubber stamp.
Primacy of the collegium
The collegium curtails the discretion of President enshrined in the Article 124(2) to consult such judges of the SC, judges of the HC as he may deem necessary for the purpose. If President deems it necessary to consult the judges outside of Collegium or other HC judges, he should be able to. Collegium restricts it. This is a breach of the letter and spirit of the Constitution.