In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered that a candidate should have at least three years of practice as a lawyer to enter judicial services. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih reaffirmed the importance of courtroom exposure for prospective judges. “The appointment of fresh law graduates has led to several difficulties, as noted by multiple high courts. Practical experience in court is essential for ensuring judicial efficiency and competence,” the CJI said while pronouncing the judgement. The bench said the minimum of three years of legal practice is mandatory for appearing in the judicial service examination for entry-level civil judge posts that are lower division cadre.
The CJI said allowing fresh law graduates direct entry into the judiciary has created practical challenges, as reflected in reports submitted by various High Courts. “All the high courts and the State Governments in the country shall amend the relevant service rules to the effect that candidates desirous of appearing in the examination for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) must have practiced for a minimum period of three years to be eligible for the said examination,” the SC ordered. Judgment said that such amendments to the rules must be carried out by high courts within three months, and that these amendments must then be approved by the State Governments within a further period of three months. The SC, however, clarified that this requirement of having at least three years of legal practice for entry to judicial service will not apply to ongoing judicial recruitment but will only apply prospectively.
“The judges from the very day on which they assume office have to deal with the questions of life, liberty, property and reputation of litigants. As rightly observed, neither knowledge derived from books nor pre-service training can be an adequate substitute for the first-hand experience of the working of the court-system and the administration of justice.
“This is possible only when a candidate is exposed to the atmosphere in the court by assisting the seniors and observing how the lawyers and the Judges function in the court. The candidate should be equipped to understand the intricacies of the functions of a Judge. The experience of various high courts has also shown that such fresh law graduates, upon their entry in judicial service, begin to show behavioural and temperament problems,” the judgment reads.
It clarified that the three years of legal practice can be counted from the date on which a law graduate starts practice on the basis of a provisional enrolment and not from the date on which a lawyer clears the All India Bar Exam (AIBE). Whether or not a candidate has three years of legal practice is to be certified, either (a) by the concerned principal judicial officer or (b) by an advocate with ten years of standing at the Bar, duly endorsed by the principal judicial officer of such a district or station, said the judgment.
If the candidate has been practicing before the high courts or SC, the certificate shall be issued by an advocate with ten years of standing, duly endorsed by an officer designated by the high court or SC. The court also held that a candidate’s experience as a law clerk to a judge can be counted towards legal practice.
The apex court has further ordered that entry-level judicial candidates must undergo at least one year of training before they are permitted to preside over a court. The verdict came on a plea filed by the All India Judges Association.