LawLoveLegal

Introduction: The Case for Judicial Parity The Supreme Court of India has initiated hearings on one of the most significant reform issues concerning the district judiciary —the disparity in promotions between judges recruited as Civil Judges and those appointed as Direct District Judges . A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai , along with Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, K. Vinod Chandran, and Joymalya Bagchi , is examining this anomaly, which has long been a structural imbalance in the judicial hierarchy. The issue arises from the fact that civil judges , despite decades of service, often do not reach the higher positions such as Principal District Judge (PDJ) or High Court Judge , whereas direct recruits progress faster in rank and remuneration. The Problem: Inequality in Judicial Promotions The Court highlighted the lack of equal opportunity within the judicial system, particularly in the career progression of judicial ...

In a transformative decision set to reshape India’s judicial recruitment framework, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that serving judicial officers with at least seven years of prior practice as advocates are eligible to apply for district judge posts under the quota reserved for the Bar. The judgment, hailed as a milestone, emphasizes inclusivity, merit, and efficiency in the district judiciary — the foundational tier of India’s judicial system. Five-Judge Bench Delivers Constitutionally Significant Ruling A five-judge Constitution Bench , led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai , and comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh, Aravind Kumar, Satish Chandra Sharma, and K. Vinod Chandran , delivered the verdict on Thursday. The court held that excluding serving judges who previously practiced law for seven years from the pool of candidates for direct recruitment would be “discriminatory” and detrimental to judicial efficiency . The bench clarified that such officers ca...