Supreme Court Refers To Constitution Bench Issue Regarding Lack Of Promotion Chances For Judicial Officers

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 7) referred to a Constitution Bench the issues relating to the career stagnation faced by young judicial officers, who join entry-level posts, due to limited promotional avenues in judicial service.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran passed the reference order in the All India Judges Association case.

Earlier, the bench had sought the responses of the High Courts and the State Governments, expressing concerns over the issue. Senior Advocate Siddharth Bhatnagar, the amicus curiae in case, had highlighted an "anomalous situation" in many States, where Judicial Officers recruited as Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) often do not reach even the level of the Principal District Judge, leave alone reaching the position of the High Court Judge. The amicus stated that this situation often discouraged bright youngsters from joining the judiciary.

The amicus put forth a proposal to reserve a certain percentage of posts from the cadre of Principal District Judges for the promotion of Judges selected initially from the JMFC Cadre. In the hearing today, Senior Advocate R Basant opposed this proposal, saying that this will deny opportunities to meritorious candidates who wait for direct recruitment as District Judges.

In the order passed today, the bench observed that a balance will have to be struck between the competing claims. However, this would involve consideration of some of the earlier orders passed by 3-judge benches. 

"In any case, in order to put the entire controversy to rest and to provide a permanent solution for a long time, we are of the considered view that the issue is considered by a Constitution Bench consisting of 5-judges," the bench observed.

Many High Courts contested the position that entry-level officers were facing stagnation. CJI BR Gavai observed that the only concern was regarding maintaining a balance. "Otherwise a young judicial officer who enters the service at the age of 25-26, and retires only as an Additional District Judge, will have some sort of heart-burning," CJI orally observed.

Basant said that there was an "other side" to it, where a person directly appointed as a District Judge continues only as that throughout the service.  

CJI Gavai said that the ultimate concern was to ensure the efficiency of the administration. CJI recalled an anecdote shared by Justice Sundresh about his law clerk who joined judicial service but resigned after two years, since there were limited promotion chances.

"Some sort of balancing out is needed, some middle way, so that efficiency of administration of justice is enhanced," CJI Gavai said. Basant however said that it should not be an attempt to treat unequals as equals. "They join service fully knowing the consequences. Whereas, a direct recruitee joins much later, after a long stint of practice...." Basant said.

Case Title: ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION vs Union of India 

Click Here To Read/Download Order