3-year law practice must for entry-level exams to become judge: Supreme Court
The original verdict, delivered by a bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai, barred fresh law graduates from appearing in entry-level judicial services exams.It specified that a law graduate must practice law for at least three years before being eligible. The court, however, clarified that the experience gained during legal internships could be counted toward the three-year requirement.The recent plea argued that sitting judicial officers, by virtue of their work in courts, have practical experience equivalent to practising lawyers and should therefore be eligible for the exams in other states.On Thursday, the bench, comprising Chief Justice Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, rejected the plea.SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS ELIGIBILITY, BARS SERVING JUDGES FROM APPEARINGThe bench emphasised that allowing serving judges to take the exams would disrupt the uniformity of eligibility and potentially create administrative and legal complications. 'What is wrong in Madhya Pradesh? we will not modify this. This will open Pandora's box,' the Chief Justice said while dismissing the petition.The Supreme Court's decision has reinforced the principle that judicial services examinations are meant for those who have spent a minimum period in legal practice.The verdict aims to maintain a clear distinction between law graduates entering the judiciary through practice and those already serving in the judicial system.Legal experts have noted that the ruling will standardise entry requirements across states, preventing ad hoc eligibility modifications.At the same time, it limits avenues for judicial officers seeking transfers or appearing in exams outside their current postings.With this judgment, law graduates seeking entry into judicial services now have a definitive guideline: three years of active legal practice is a non-negotiable prerequisite.The court's decision underscores the importance of uniform eligibility standards for the judicial recruitment process and avoids exceptions that could lead to inconsistent interpretations in different states.- Ends
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Scientific temper important to fully claim Right to Life: Retd Supreme Court Judge Abhay Oka
Scientific temper is important to completely claim the Right to Life, said retired Supreme Court Judge Abhay Oka while delivering the Dr Narendra Dabholkar Memorial Lecture in Pune on Sunday. Oka emphasised that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guaranteed the Right to Life with dignity and prosperity, and that a scientific temper was important to fully claim these rights. Oka said, 'If Article 21 of the Constitution has given us a Right to Life with dignity, what does it mean? It is not just living with respect but also living meaningfully. Reading good literature and good thoughts, artwork, watching a comedy film or a stand-up comedian's show, this makes life prosperous. This is how we fulfill the Right to Life. Therefore, it is important to develop a scientific temper and spirit of enquiry to fully claim the Right to Life with prosperity.' The retired judge also talked about how people use scientific equipment in their daily lives but do not develop a scientific temper: 'In Article 51(a) of the Constitution where scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform come together…Just using scientific equipment does not mean that people have scientific temper. In a lighter vein, DJs are used in many of our festivals. These hurt the ears and are their levels much above the permitted decibel limits according to the rules. DJ systems are created by science, but just because we are using it we cannot say that we have scientific temper.' At the same event, Retired Supreme Court Judge Hemant Gokhale said, 'We killed Dr Dabhokar, also killed comrade (Govind) Pansare. This is the disposition of Maharashtra today. And the way minority and minority religion people are being harassed, this is against scientific temper…You all must have read that day before in Jamner, a young man was killed because he belonged to a religion. What kind of scientific temper is this?' The lecture was held before the 12th anniversary of the assasination of Dr Narendra Dabholkar on August 20, who was one of India's foremost rationalists and anti-superstition activists. Dabholkar was gunned down in Pune in 2013 while on a walk. Two people were convicted for his murder in 2024 by a special court in Pune while three others, including the mastermind accused, were acquitted due to lack of evidence. All accused had links to extremist Hindu organisation Sanatan Sanstha. MANS and Dabholkar's family have questioned the CBI for not appealing the acquittals in higher courts.
Hans India
3 hours ago
- Hans India
SC to hear Jharkhand DGP appointment row on Monday
The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Monday a clutch of petitions challenging the appointment of Anurag Gupta as the Director General of Police (DGP) of Jharkhand. As per the causelist published on the website of the apex court, a Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria will also take a plea seeking contempt action against Jharkhand Chief Secretary for "wilfully and deliberately disobeying" the guidelines laid down in the Prakash Singh vs Union of India case. According to the judgment, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is required to shortlist three eligible IPS officers with clean service records and sufficient residual service from a list submitted by the state. The state government must then appoint one of the shortlisted officers as the DGP, who must be given a minimum tenure of two years. As per the plea, the Jharkhand government has appointed Gupta without following the due process, as his name was not on the UPSC-recommended list. Additionally, it introduced a new rule to appoint Gupta, who was set to retire on April 30, 2025 and granted him an extension until April 2026. "These newly formulated rules are in blatant violation of the mandate laid down by this Hon'ble Court in the Prakash Singh judgment and subsequent orders. The state government has wilfully and deliberately eliminated the requirement for empanelment by the UPSC, a cornerstone of transparency and merit-based appointments, and replaced it with a state-controlled selection committee,' stated the petition filed through advocate Vivya Nagpal. In a letter to the state government, the Union Home Ministry said that Gupta, having turned 60 in April 2025, stands retired under the All India Services (AIS) rules and cannot continue in service. In July 2024, the Hemant Soren-led Jharkhand government had removed then DGP Ajay Kumar Singh before the completion of his two-year tenure. Ajay Kumar Singh was appointed DGP on February 14, 2023, and was due to serve until February 2025, but was removed prematurely.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Can't share machine-readable voters list: CEC Gyanesh Kumar cites SC order
Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar stated that sharing voter lists in machine-readable format with political parties is prohibited, citing a 2019 Supreme Court judgment. While searchable voter lists are available online, the machine-readable format is restricted due to potential misuse and privacy concerns. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Citing a 2019 Supreme Court judgment Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar on Sunday said that the voter list in machine-readable format cannot be shared with political also said there was a difference between machine-readable and searchable a press conference here, Kumar said that the voter list available on its website can be searched using a voter card number and can also be said the machine-readable format is barred as it can be edited and can lead to its Congress has been demanding the voter list in machine-readable format, saying it will help it flag CEC said that in 2019, the top court had sided with its stand that a machine-readable format cannot be shared as it could compromise voters' pointed out that the issue was already raised by the Congress before the Supreme Court in a writ petition in 2018 filed by Kamal Nath , the then president of the Madhya Pradesh Congress to the Supreme Court verdict in Kamal Nath vs Election Commission of India , (2019), the officials said that the top court had observed that it found force in the submission of 11.2.2.2 of the Election Manual uses the expression " text mode ". The draft electoral roll in text mode has been supplied to the petitioner, the apex court had said."The clause nowhere says that the draft electoral roll has to be put up on the Chief Electoral Officer's website in a 'searchable PDF'."Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim, as a right, that the draft electoral roll should be placed on the website in a 'searchable mode'. It has only to be in 'text mode' and it is so provided," the apex court had observed.
