Supreme Court to Decide if Judicial Officers Can Be Appointed as District Judges Under Bar Quota
The Supreme Court has referred to a five-judge Constitution Bench the question of whether a judicial officer, who had completed seven years in the Bar before joining judicial service, can be appointed as a District Judge against a Bar quota vacancy.
The Court will also decide whether the eligibility for such appointments should be assessed at the time of submitting the application, at the time of appointment, or both.
A bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran, and Justice NV Anjaria noted that the matter involves the interpretation of Article 233(2) of the Constitution, which states that a person not in the service of the Union or the State can be appointed as a District Judge only if they have practised as an advocate or pleader for at least seven years.
The case arises from an appeal against a Kerala High Court decision that set aside the appointment of Rejanish KV as a District Judge. The High Court held he was ineligible since, at the time of his appointment, he was not a practising advocate but was serving as a Munsiff.
Rejanish KV had applied for the post of District Judge after having practised for over seven years. However, during the selection process, he was appointed as a Munsiff-Magistrate in December 2017. In August 2019, after being selected as a District Judge, he resigned from the subordinate judiciary and took charge in Thiruvananthapuram.
A writ petition by another candidate, K Deepa, challenged his appointment. The Kerala High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Dheeraj Mor v. High Court of Delhi, which held that a candidate applying under the Bar quota must remain a practising advocate until the date of appointment.
The Division Bench, while upholding the Single Bench ruling, noted that several similar appointments might have been made in other states under rules different from the principle laid down in Dheeraj Mor. The matter was thus re
ferred to the Supreme Court for authoritative clarity.
Case: Rejanish K.V. vs. K. Deepa [Civil Appeal No(s). 3947/2020]
