The way the dispute between the Supreme Court and the government on the appointment of judges is increasing, it is not a good sign. Both the parties have to understand that there is a need for dialogue, not dispute, in this matter. It is disappointing that no initiative seems to be taking place to meet this need. In place of any such initiative, both the parties and especially the Supreme Court are more adamant and aggressive in their stand. Evidence of this was found when he made public parts of the report, which was handed over to him by the government in the context of judges to be appointed. This report contained information provided by intelligence agencies. There can be no bigger irony than this that the Supreme Court should do the work of making public the assessments of intelligence agencies. Union Law Minister Kiren rightly objected to this. The Supreme Court may have done this work to prove itself right, but it has to understand that it cannot prove the collegium as constitutional. It does not, because it has not been said in the constitution that the appointment of judges will be done through the Collegium formed by the Supreme Court. Collegium system is not only against the basic spirit of the constitution, but also against democratic norms. It would be understandable that the appointment of judges should not be according to the government, but it cannot mean that it should be completely at the discretion of the Supreme Court. This is the situation at present. The role of the government in the appointment of judges is similar to that of the post master. The Supreme Court has taken everything in its hands. The most strange thing is that he is not even ready to rectify the Memorandum of Procedure related to the appointment process of judges, while he himself agreed that it needed improvement. In fact for this reason it is said that the Supreme Court has usurped the process of appointment of judges. After all, why can't there be such a system in the appointment of judges.