Supreme Court Seeks Input on Three-Year Practice Requirement for Judicial Exams
The Supreme Court has taken a significant step toward reviewing the mandatory three-year legal practice requirement for entry-level judicial services examinations. On Thursday, the Court requested opinions and recommendations from all High Courts, National Law Universities (NLUs), and other legal education institutions across the country on this contentious issue.
The matter came up for hearing before a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vijay Bishnoi also present. The bench was examining a petition filed by the Bhumika Trust, which sought exemptions for law graduates with disabilities from the three-year practice condition.
Court’s Stance on Exemptions for Persons with Disabilities
The petitioner argued that lawyers with disabilities often struggle to secure positions under practicing advocates, making it extremely difficult for them to fulfill the three-year practice requirement. The Trust therefore requested that this condition be waived for such candidates.
However, the Supreme Court adopted a firm position on this argument, stating that any concession extended must apply uniformly to all law graduates rather than benefiting a specific group. The Court further observed that granting exemptions to particular categories could potentially foster feelings of inferiority among those candidates after they enter judicial service.
During the proceedings, the petitioner also referenced an exemption previously provided to PwD candidates in Madhya Pradesh. The Court, however, emphasized the necessity of implementing consistent rules throughout the nation, rather than allowing regional variations in eligibility criteria.
Court Acknowledges Student Discontent
The bench also took note of the frustration and discouragement prevailing among young law students in response to the current requirement. Recognizing this sentiment, the Court expressed its desire to understand student perspectives on the matter before arriving at any final decision.
“We want all High Courts and National Law Universities to share their suggestions on this issue,” the Court stated. “If any modification becomes necessary, it will be implemented uniformly for everyone concerned.”
Suggestions Sought Within Four Weeks
As part of its directive, the Supreme Court instructed all High Courts to place the order before their respective Chief Justices. Additionally, every High Court, NLU, and law college has been asked to submit their views and recommendations to the Court within a four-week timeframe.
This development marks an important moment in the ongoing debate over judicial service entry criteria, as the Court opens the floor to institutional input before potentially revising the existing framework. The decision to consult a wide range of stakeholders suggests that the final outcome may carry significant implications for aspiring judicial officers across India.
The practice requirement has been a point of contention among law graduates, particularly those who face systemic barriers in securing meaningful legal experience. By inviting suggestions from educational institutions and High Courts, the Supreme Court appears committed to arriving at a balanced solution that serves the interests of both the judicial system and its prospective entrants.
Observers will be watching closely to see how the consultation process unfolds and whether the Court ultimately decides to relax, retain, or restructure the three-year advocacy mandate for judicial service aspirants.
