Today, On 4th November, The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on framing uniform, nationwide seniority rules for higher judicial services to address disparities in career progression among judges across India, after hearing extensive arguments on reservation, promotion policies, and the ROTA system.
Today, On 29th October, During the All India Judges Association Case hearing, The Supreme Court clarified that it has no intention of curbing the discretion of High Courts in recommending names for appointments but questioned why each High Court is following a different policy in the process.
Today, On 14th October the Supreme Court decided that it will hear Judicial Promotions Case on October 28–29, with CJI Seeking Data from All High Courts: “How Many Appointed Through Direct Recruitment and Judicial Service?” to Examine Seniority and Promotion Patterns in the Judiciary.
Today, On 9th October, Supreme Court rules that judicial officers who have completed 7 years of practice at the Bar before joining service are now eligible for appointment as District Judges. Minimum age for application set at 35 years.
Today, On 23rd September, Supreme Court debates whether judicial officers with seven or more years of experience under the Bar vacancies, can be eligible for direct recruitment as District Judges. The hearing focused on interpretation of Article 233 and past legal precedents.
Today, On 23rd September, A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court has commenced hearing on the eligibility of judicial officers for appointment as district judges under Bar vacancies, addressing a crucial legal question with wide implications for judicial recruitment.
Today, On 12th September, The Supreme Court Constitution Bench agreed that it will hear on September 23 on whether a judicial officer with more than seven years’ bar experience before joining service can be considered eligible for appointment as a district judge in bar quota vacancies.
Civil Judge Aditi Kumar Sharma, who quit in protest after accusing a colleague of harassment, has rejoined service following assurance from a High Court panel. She called her earlier resignation “a statement of protest.”
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a judicial officer’s plea challenging his compulsory retirement by the Uttar Pradesh government. The court upheld the Allahabad High Court’s decision that supported a screening committee’s recommendation based on the officer’s service record, deeming him unfit for continued service.
CJI B.R. Gavai praised the proposal for a Bombay High Court bench in Kolhapur, saying every citizen should get justice “without spending much time and money,” highlighting the need to improve access to justice across Maharashtra.
