New Delhi, Jan 15: The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the opinion of all the high courts, National Law Universities and other law schools on the minimum three-year law practice criterion for appearing in entry level judicial services examination.
The top court, on May 20 last year, barred fresh law graduates from appearing in entry level judicial services examination, fixing a minimum three-year law practice criterion.
On Thursday, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vijay Bishnoi was hearing a plea filed by Bhumika Trust, seeking exemption for law graduates who belong to the Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) category from the minimum three-year law practice requirement.
The key submission was that the specially-abled law graduates are not hired by lawyers and hence, the three-year law practice criterion be relaxed for them.
The bench, however, said that any such enabling criterion should be the same for all law graduates.
The petitioner also brought up a similar exemption that had been allowed for specially-abled candidates in Madhya Pradesh.
The court noted that allowing such an exemption for specific categories might lead to the exempted categories feeling inferior once they are in service, and pushed for uniform rules across states.
“We find that young students are disappointed and demoralised as well with this decision. We are planning to get feedback from the students in the National Law Universities (NLUs) and all high courts. If at all any variation is required, we will do it for everyone,” the court said.
The court noted that before taking any holistic view with regard to the present application seeking exemptions for PwDs, collecting the feedback of all HCs and NLUs across the nation, seeking their opinions and suggestions on the minimum three-year practice criterion, might provide a broader perspective on the matter.
“We direct all the high courts to place this order before their hon’ble chief justices. All the HCs as well as NLUs and law schools are requested to give their suggestions within four weeks,” the bench said.
On May 20, a bench headed by former chief justice B R Gavai barred fresh law graduates from appearing in entry-level judicial examinations and fixed a minimum three-year law practice requirement.
The verdict said that candidates must practice law for at least three years before becoming eligible to take the judicial services exam.
In the earlier case, from the affidavits of almost all the high courts, the court found evident that the recruitment of fresh law graduates as judicial officers, without a single day of practice at the bar, had not been a “successful experience” and that such graduates, upon their entry in judicial service, started to show “behavioural and temperamental problems”.
The court was conscious that a young law graduate would have “minimal” opportunities, but said exposure to courts, particularly litigants and their briefs, would acquaint them with the “onerous duties and responsibilities” of every stakeholder in the judicial system.
“It would bring in a sensitivity to human problems, more clarity in the decision-making process and educate them on the role of the Bar in justice dispensation,” the court added.
