Explanation:

Both statements 1&3 are incorrect.

Evolution of the System of judicial appointments

• First Judges Case (1981): SC ruled that the “consultation” with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in the matter of appointments must be full and effective.
• However, the CJI’s opinion should have primacy.

Second Judges Case (1993): SC introduced the Collegium system, holding that “consultation” really meant “concurrence”.

• It added that it was not the CJI’s individual opinion, but an institutional opinion formed in consultation with the two senior-most judges in the SC. 

Third Judges Case (1998): SC on President’s reference expanded the Collegium to a five-member body, comprising the CJI and four of his senior-most colleagues.

• Judges of the higher judiciary are appointed only through the collegium system and the government has a role only after names have been decided by the collegium.
• The attempt made to replace the collegium by a ‘National Judicial Appointments Commission’ was struck down by the court in 2015 on the ground that it posed a threat to the independence of the judiciary. 

Article 124(2) of the Indian Constitution provides that the Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President after consultation with such a number of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem necessary for the purpose.

• Article 217 of the Indian Constitution states that the Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State, and, in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of the High Court.

Hence option 3rd is correct.