The Supreme Court on Thursday held that judicial officers, who have completed seven years of practice as advocates prior to joining the bench, can be considered for appointment as district judges against vacancies reserved for members of the bar.
A five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices M M Sundresh, Aravind Kumar, S C Sharma and K Vinod Chandran delivered two separate judgements to hold that judicial officers of subordinate judiciary are entitled to become district judges under direct recruitment process meant for advocates only.
“Judicial officers already completed seven years at bar before being in service will be entitled to be appointed as district judge,” the CJI said.
Delivering the judgement, the CJI said the interpretation of the constitutional scheme has to be “organic” and not “pedantic”.
“All the state governments in consultation with the high courts shall amend the rules in accordance with what has been held by us within a period of three months,” the judgement said.
Justice Sundresh delivered a separate and concurring verdict and held, “Letting go of the emerging talent by not identifying at and nurturing them at the earliest would lead to mediocrity as against the excellence, which would weaken the foundation and undermine the judicial structure. It is obvious that greater competition will serve a better quality.” The detailed judgement is awaited.
The top court had reserved the judgement on September 25 on over 30 petitions for three days on the issues believed to have wide ramifications for judicial recruitment across the country.
The bench examined questions over the interpretation of Article 233 of the Constitution that governs appointment of district judges.
One of the key questions for consideration was “whether a judicial officer, who has already completed seven years at the bar before joining judicial service, is entitled to appointment as an additional district judge against bar quota vacancies”. (AGENCIES)
