The Supreme Court collegium of judges has discussed the names of seven high court chief justices for promotion to the apex institution, The Indian Express reported on Monday. The move comes even as the judiciary and the Centre continue to work on a memorandum of procedure for the appointment of judges to vacant posts in courts.

Four members of the collegium, at a recent meeting, favoured nominating the chief justices of the high courts of Bombay, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Jammu and Kashmir, Rajasthan and Uttarakhand to the apex court, according to the report. However, Justice Jasti Chelameswar – the fifth member of the collegium who did not attend the meeting – objected to at least one of the names discussed by the rest of the body, and conveyed his views in writing to the rest of its members.

Chelameswar also reportedly told Chief Justice of India TS Thakur that he would not attend future meetings of the collegium and asked that the body notify him of its recommendations. The apex court judge had been the only one who dissented during the court’s ruling on the validity of the National Judicial Appointments Commission last year. Chelameswar had ruled in favour of removing the collegium system to appoint judges.

On Friday, the Centre had approved 34 of the 77 collegium-recommended names for high court appointments. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had told the Supreme Court that no files on the matter were left with the central government. The collegium has yet to respond to the draft memorandum of procedure on the appointments of judges submitted to it by the Centre, Rohatgi told the court.

The top court had directed the government to prepare the memorandum in consultation with the chief justice, following its ruling against the establishment of the commission in October 2015.

The collegium system of appointing judges is one by which the judiciary appoints the judges of the Supreme Court and high courts of India. It came into force in 1993, but was ousted by the Parliament in April 2015. The appointments commission, which gave the government the power to appoint judges, was then proposed. The NJAC was struck down as unconstitutional in October that year by the Supreme Court, after which it upheld that it was open to bringing in more transparency in the system of appointing judges.