This is the third time the panel has deferred its decision on the matter.
A press conference he addressed on January 12, along with three other senior-most judges, complaining how Chief Justice Dipak Misra allocated cases selectively to benches of his preferences marked the culmination of his dissent. As a result, this delayed the proposal on appointment of Justice K M Joseph.
According to the sources, since Justice K.M. Joseph's name had already been "in principle" reiterated at the last meeting, not much of Wednesday's discussion revolved around him.
When the collegium finally formalises its reiteration of Justice Joseph and sends the file back to the government, the latter would be bound by the collegium's decision.
The Supreme Court Collegium, which met again yesterday to decide on the recommendations to the government on the promotion of come high court judges to the Supreme Court remained inconclusive.
Official sources said those high court judges who are in the race to be elevated to the apex court are Chief Justice of Madras High Court Indira Banerjee, who is originally from the Calcutta HC; Gujarat HC Chief Justice R Subhash Reddy, whose parent cadre is Telangana and Andhra Pradesh HC, and Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, who is originally from Rajasthan HC.
But, the government, while sending back Justice Joseph's recommendation for reconsideration, had invoked the principle of seniority, saying that Justice Joseph stood at number 42 of the seniority of the high court judges and there were 11 Chief Justices of various high courts senior to him - a clear suggestion that any elevation of Justice Joseph to top court would be at their expense.
The government had also flagged the issue of non-representation of SC/ST judges in the apex court.
The NJAC judgment marked the beginning of Justice Chelameswars journey of dissent which took several shapes later in the form of letter wars with CJIs on the issue of lack of transparency in collegium proceedings and public utterances to the effect.