Recently, the Bar Council of India has issued a press release stating that it has approached the Supreme Court by filing intervention application in writ petition challenging 3 year practice requirement to appear in judicial exam.
The Press release states that there should be three-year eligibility criteria for law graduates who want to join the judicial services.
The BCI’s impleadment application states that judicial officers who do not have the requisite experience are mostly incapable and inept in handling cases, which leads to a delay in disposal of cases in lower courts.
As of now, new law graduates can join the Judicial services without practising as a lawyer.
The instant impleadment application has been filed in a petition from Andhra Pradesh challenging the law practice’s three-year eligibility criteria to sit for the Civil Judge exam.
On 30th December a vacation Bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Indira Banerjee and Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Bose had issued a notice in Andhra Pradesh’s petition. Still, it had refused to stay Rule 5(2)a(i) of AP State Judicial Service Rules of 2007(which laid down the eligibility criteria).
On 3rd December, the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission invited applications for appointment as Civil Judge Junior Division. Still, it stipulated that lawyers with three years of experience as an Advocate can only apply.
The petitioner(a civil judge aspirant) challenged AP’s notification and submitted that it violated Apex Court’s 2002 order in All India Judges Association & others vs Union of India.
In All India Judges Association & others v. Union of India, the Apex Court had ruled that requirement of experience was not allowed.
The BCI sought to modify the order and stated that most judicial officers who do not have experience at the Bar were impractical and impolite while dealing with litigants and Members of the Bar.