Who Can Be District Judge? SC Refers Judicial Officers' Eligibility Case To Constitution Bench

News18

7 days ago

Last Updated:
SC refers to Constitution bench issue of judicial officers' eligibility for direct District Judge recruitment under Article 233(2) after Bar experience.
The Supreme Court has referred to a five-judge Constitution bench the issue of whether judicial officers, who had completed seven years in the Bar before joining the subordinate judiciary, are entitled to be considered for direct recruitment as Additional District Judges against vacancies reserved for advocates.
The bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria also framed a related question on whether eligibility for appointment as District Judge is to be assessed at the time of appointment, at the time of application, or both.
The court directed its registry to place the matter before the CJI on the administrative side for appropriate orders. The reference arose in a batch of petitions challenging the February 19, 2020 judgment in Dheeraj Mor vs Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, where a three-judge bench held that under Article 233(2) of the Constitution, an advocate or pleader with seven years' practice could be appointed as District Judge by way of direct recruitment only if they were not already in the judicial service of the Union or a State. That judgment also upheld rules framed by High Courts debarring judicial officers from applying for direct recruitment posts reserved for the Bar.
The present petitions seek a declaration that judicial officers who had seven years' Bar experience prior to joining service should also be eligible for such direct recruitment under Article 233(2). Some counsel argued that the matter requires consideration by a Constitution bench, while others opposed the reference. The court noted that Article 145(3) mandates a minimum of five judges to decide any substantial question of constitutional interpretation or to hear a reference under Article 143.
It further recorded that the issues involve interpretation of Article 233(2) and that, although an order in January 2018 had directed the matter to be placed before the CJI for listing before an appropriate bench, the Dheeraj Mor case was decided by a three-judge bench.
Observing that the issues in the current petitions ought to have been decided by a bench of not less than five judges, the court referred the matter accordingly.
view comments
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.