Recruitment of judicial officers as District Judges under Bar quota | Constitution Bench to commence arguments from 23 September

Court narrows down the issues

The case involves two central questions: 

1. Can judicial officers with an experience of at least seven years in the Bar be recruited to the post of a District Judge under the Bar quota? 
2. Should eligibility be reckoned at the time of application, or at the time of appointment, or both?

CJI Gavai observed that Article 233(2), which concerns the appointment of district judges, was broad enough to address the issue. The Chief directed counsels to prepare a common compilation containing any other connected issues. He remarked, “It is a question of interpretation of the judgement, because I think there are two Constitution Bench decisions also.”

The case arises from the appointment of Rejanish K.V., a practising advocate with over seven years at the Bar. He applied for appointment as a District Judge through the Bar quota. Before his appointment was finalised he was appointed as a munsiff in the Kerala subordinate judiciary. 

A Single Judge of the Kerala High Court, relying on Dheeraj Mor v High Court of Delhi (2020), held that only practising advocates at the time of appointment were eligible under the Bar quota. Since Rejanish was serving as a judicial officer at the time of appointment, his selection was set aside. On appeal, a Division Bench upheld this view but referred the matter as a substantial constitutional question under Article 233(2).

On August 12, a three-judge Bench led by CJI Gavai, with Justices K.V. Chandran and N.V. Anjaria, referred the case to a larger Bench. 

The Bench indicated that counsels supporting the direct recruitment under the Bar quota will argue first, followed by the opposing side.