In need of a practical plan

In need of a practical plan

Article:

1. Diksha Sanyal of Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy and Professor Rangin P. Tripathy of National Law University, Odhisha, highlight the lacunae in the stage-wise and uniform timeline for lower judicial appointments

Important Analysis:

2. Prevailing Issue:

• Recruitment to the lower judiciary has been under public scrutiny due to its failure to fill 23% of vacancies that persist.
• At present the recruitment process is a subject matter of a PIL filed in the Supreme Court

3. Recruitment Timelines:

• In Malik Mazhar vs. U.P. Public Service Commission (2008), The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of a prescribed time-schedule for judicial service examinations
• The Court had laid down stage-wise time lines for lower judicial appointments
• Civil judges (junior division) timeline for appointment is within 321 days
• For district judges (direct recruitment) timeline for appointment is within 183 days
• Note: An examination cycle is calculated from the date of notification to the last date for joining.

4. Issues with the timeline:
5. Rational behind such a timeline is unclear:

• The SC does not give any adequate justification for determining these timelines. No clear, scientific principle or methodology has been offered for the timelines

1. Inaccurate benchmark to measure performance of States:

• It does not consider different sanctioned strengths and State resources in conducting such exams.
• A study by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy explains the issue. States with lesser sanctioned strengths also have lower numbers of applicants. These states tend to have an advantage in adhering to the timeline.

For example: Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra:

• For civil judges, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra have a sanctioned strength of 62 and 1,118, respectively.
• Both the states should finish their recruitment cycles within 321 days.
• However, the study found that while Himachal Pradesh could complete its cycle within an average of 178 days, Maharashtra took 443 days

1. Strict adherence to timelines affects judicial aspirants:

• Strict adherence to the timeline makes it impossible for aspiring candidates to appear for examinations in multiple States
• This hampers the career opportunities of candidates who are otherwise eligible for judicial service in multiple States.

5. Suggested measures:

• The timelines should be flexible; subjected to modifications based on the administrative and resource capacities of the states
• The Supreme Court should adopt a timeline based on proper data and methodology