Supreme Court refers issue of career stagnation of judicial officers to Constitution bench

Apex court was hearing a plea filed by the All India Judges Association on issues related to service conditions, pay scales, and career progression of judicial officers

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to fix before the Constitution bench the issue of resolving career stagnation suffered by judicial officers in the subordinate judiciary across the country. 

A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran passed the reference order while hearing a plea filed by the All India Judges Association on issues related to service conditions, pay scales, and career progression of judicial officers.

The court observed that a comprehensive solution was needed to address the limited promotional avenues available to those who join the judiciary at entry-level positions. The bench said that divergent views had been expressed by several High Courts and State governments in their responses to the notices earlier issued by the Supreme Court on the issue.

“Some High Courts have taken a view that on account of the prevailing situation, the judges who initially enter the service as civil judge (junior division) are not in a position to reach up to the post of district judge,” the court said.

'Anomalous situation'

The bench took note of the “anomalous situation” prevalent in many States, where judicial officers who begin their careers as Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) often retire without ever reaching the post of principal district judge (PDJ), let alone elevation to the High Court bench.

However, senior advocate R Basant opposed the proposal, contending that such a move would unfairly disadvantage meritorious candidates aspiring for direct recruitment as district judges. During the hearing, the Chief Justice acknowledged the concerns raised by both sides but emphasised the need to strike a fair balance. 

"A young judicial officer who enters service at the age of 25 or 26 and retires only as an additional district judge will naturally feel some sort of heartburning," he said. The court emphasised that some sort of balancing out is needed, some middle way, so that the efficiency of administration of justice is enhanced.

"In any case, to put the entire controversy to rest and to provide a permanent solution, we are of the considered view that the issue is considered by a Constitution bench consisting of five judges," the bench added.

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