Supreme Court upholds Telangana rule on 7-yr practice, allows 2023 district judge appointments as special case

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to intervene in the Telangana Judicial Service Rule that requires candidates to have seven years of practice in the state’s courts to be considered eligible for appointment as district judges.

A bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George observed that the Telangana High Court had expressed “no objection to declare the results and to appoint such of the appellants/petitioners/intervenors who had qualified the 2023 recruitment examination for the appointment as district judges as an exceptional case without unsettling the 2023 rule.” With this observation, the bench disposed of the petitions challenging the High Court’s earlier verdict.

The apex court noted, “We appreciate the stand taken by the High Court and, accordingly, request the High Court to declare the results of the appellants/petitioners/intervenors and to proceed for verification of their credentials/antecedents.” The bench further directed that “such of the qualified appellants/petitioners/intervenors who are found suitable may be appointed by offering them letters of appointment, as a special case, as early as possible but not later than two months from date of service of a copy of this order on the High Court.”

The petitioners, including advocates and public prosecutors practising outside Telangana, had earlier argued that the eligibility criterion amounted to “domicile reservation” and was discriminatory. They contended that the rule unfairly barred them from competing for judicial posts in the state despite their qualifications.

However, the Telangana High Court had already rejected these claims, ruling that the condition was a legitimate professional requirement. It maintained that the purpose of the rule was to ensure judicial officers were well-versed in the state’s laws, its language, and the procedures followed in local courts.

The Supreme Court made it clear that its order “was strictly confined to the facts and circumstances of the appeals and petitions before it and may not be treated as a precedent for future cases.” The bench also clarified the terms of such appointments, stating, “Since the appointments are being offered acceding to a suggestion of this Court, the appellants/petitioners/intervenors, upon their appointment as District Judge shall not be entitled to claim any arrears of monetary benefits and their seniority shall be determined based on their dates of appointment, meaning thereby that those who have already been appointed shall rank senior to them.”

Thus, while providing relief to those who had qualified in the 2023 examination, the top court left the validity of the Telangana rule intact, balancing the interests of the petitioners with the state judiciary’s stand on professional eligibility.

With inputs from PTI