Supreme Court Reserves Verdict On Framing Nationwide Seniority Norms In Judiciary

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai reserved the judgment on the issue after hearing a battery of senior lawyers, including advocate and amicus curiae Sidharth Bhatnagar, Rakesh Dwivedi, P S Patwalia, Jayant Bhushan and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, among others.

The bench, also comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, is mulling to frame uniform, nationwide criteria for determining seniority in the Higher Judicial Service (HJS) cadre.

It took note of the situation that "in most of the states, judicial officers recruited as Civil Judge (CJ) often do not reach the level of Principal District Judge (PDJ), leave aside reaching the position of a High Court Judge. This has resulted in many bright young lawyers being dissuaded from joining the service at the level of CJ".

The bench is concerned over the slow and uneven career progression of entry-level judicial officers across India and began the hearing on October 28 on framing uniform, nationwide criteria for determining seniority in the HJS cadre. The case was heard on October 19 and November 4 as well.

During the hearing, the bench had said that some kind of nationwide "uniformity" in criteria for determining seniority of entry-level judicial officers is needed to deal with the slow and uneven career progression of such judges.

On October 14, the bench framed the question, which reads: "What should be the criteria for determining seniority in the cadre of Higher Judicial Services?"

The bench also clarified that while hearing the main issue, it can also consider "other ancillary or related issues".

Bhatnagar, who is assisting the bench as an amicus curiae, highlighted that promotions across most states were "driven more by seniority than by merit", owing largely to the way Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) are evaluated.

Dwivedi, appearing for the Allahabad High Court, dissuaded the top court from imposing a uniform seniority framework.

He said the matter should be left to the discretion of the High Courts, which are constitutionally empowered to manage the administration of the subordinate judiciary.

The issue of seniority and career progression of judicial officers across the country came up in a plea filed by the All India Judges Association (AIJA) in 1989.

On October 7, the Apex Court referred issues related to career stagnation faced by lower judicial officers across the country to a five-judge Constitution bench.

With PTI Inputs