Judicial Officers With 7 Years Combined Experience On Date Of Application Eligible For Direct Recruitment As District Judges : Supreme Court

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench today held that a judicial officer, who has a combined experience of seven years as a judicial officer and an advocate, is eligible to apply for direct appointment as a District Judge. The eligibility will be seen as on the date of the application.To ensure a level playing field, the Court held that the minimum age of the in-service candidates applying for District Judges' direct recruitment must be 35 years.The Court held that the state governments will have to frame rules providing eligibility for in-service candidates. The rules should provide that in-service candidates should be eligible if they have a combined experience of 7 years as a judicial officer and advocate.The judgment in Dheeraj Mor which held that in-service candidates cannot seek direct recruitment as District Judges was overruled.The judgment will only apply prospectively from today, and won't affect processes already completed or appointments already made.The 5-judge bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justices MM Sundresh, Aravind Kumar, SC Sharma and K Vinod Chandran considered the matter.The bench answered the questions as follows :(i) Judicial Officers who have already completed seven years in Bar before they were recruited in the subordinate judicial service would be entitled for being appointed as a District Judge/Additional District Judge in the selection process for the post of District Judges in the direct recruitment process;(ii) The eligibility for appointment as a District Judge/Additional District Judge is to be seen at the time of application;(iii) Though there is no eligibility prescribed under Article 233(2) for a person already in judicial service of the Union or of the State for being appointed as District Judge, in order to provide a level playing field, we direct that a candidate applying as an in-service candidate should have seven years' combined experience as a Judicial Officer and an advocate;(iv) A person who has been or who is in judicial service and has a combined experience of seven years or more as an advocate or a Judicial Officer would be eligible for being considered and appointed as a District Judge/Additional District Judge under Article 233 of the Constitution;(v) In order to ensure level playing field, we further direct that the minimum age for being considered and appointed as a District Judge/Additional District Judge for both advocates and Judicial Officers would be 35 years of age as on the date of application.(vi) It is held that the view taken in the judgments of this Court right from Satya Narain Singh till Dheeraj Mor (supra), which take a view contrary to what has been held hereinabove do not lay down the correct proposition of law.The Court directed the High Courts and State Governments to amend the rules in terms of the judgment within a period of three months from today.There were two judgments- by CJI Gavai and Justice Sundresh- both concurring.The lead judgment written by CJI Gavai observed :"..we are of the considered view that for bringing the advocates and the in-service candidates at the same level, it will be appropriate that the rules provide that an in-service candidate should be eligible for recruitment to the post of district judge directly only if he has a combined experience of seven years as an advocate and a judicial officer.Similarly, if an advocate is participating in the selection process and he was a member of judicial service in the past, then his experience as a judicial officer also cannot be ignored. His experience as an advocate prior to joining judicial service, his experience as a judicial officer and his experience as an advocate after leaving the judicial service will all have to be taken together. Such a candidate will be eligible only if he has a combined experience as an advocate and as a judicial officer for seven years."Other key takeaways from the judgemnt1. The 7-year practice must be continuous. The Court rejected the argument that persons with a break in practice must be considered if they have already completed 7 years of practice. "We say so because say if a person has practised for five years and thereafter, he takes a break of ten years and thereafter practises for two years, there will be a disconnect with the legal profession. We are, therefore, inclined to hold that only such persons working either as an advocate/pleader including Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors or as a judicial officer who, on the date of application, have a continuous experience of either an advocate/pleader or a judicial officer or a combination thereof shall only be eligible to be considered for appointment as district judges through the stream of direct recruitment," the Court said.2. No quota for advocates under Article 233(2). The Court rejected the plea for a quota for practising advocates in direct recruitment.3. To promote efficiency in the cadre of district judges, the young talented...

Judicial Officers With 7 Years Combined Experience On Date Of Application Eligible For Direct Recruitment As District Judges : Supreme Court

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Judicial Officers With 7 Years Combined Experience On Date Of Application Eligible For Direct Recruitment As District Judges : Supreme Court

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers