SC refuses to grant quota for promotee judges in Higher Judicial Service

New Delhi, Nov 19 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to grant quota for promotee judges in Higher Judicial Service (HJS), observing that there is no "common malady" of disproportionate representation which afflicts the country.

The top court said that a "perceived discontentment" and "heartburn" cannot result in creating an artificial classification of members within a cadre.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said fixation in the Selection Grade and Super Time Scale within the HJS is based on the merit-cum-seniority within the cadre and cannot depend upon the length of service or performance in the lower rungs of the judiciary.

"That, perceived discontentment and heartburn without something more in the form of a legal claim, illegal denial, or at least a legitimate expectation cannot result in creating an artificial classification of members within a cadre.

"That, the statistical data is disparate and does not provide a substantial basis to find such discontentment and heartburn of RPs (Regular Promotees), in the HJS, to be justified," the bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, K Vinod Chandran and Joymalya Bagchi, said.

The top court said in-service judicial officers have enough opportunities for advancement as district judges, which allowed them to contest for direct recruitment as district judges.

"That fixation in the Selection Grade and Super Time Scale within the HJS is based on the merit-cum-seniority within the cadre and cannot depend upon the length of service or performance in the lower rungs of the Judiciary; the latter loses its significance after RPs and LDCEs, by its virtue, are propelled into the HJS. Reliance on it does not serve the object of efficient administration of justice and is counterproductive.

"That, the length and performance as a Civil Judge also does not constitute an intelligible differentia to classify incumbents in the common cadre of District Judge and the classification on the basis of educational qualifications stands on a different footing," the bench said.

Individual career aspirations are a normal incidence of service, accentuated only by better performance, the top court said, adding they are not connected to the objective of an independent and strengthened judiciary and cannot guide the shape of the rules of seniority.

The apex court issued guidelines for the filling up of the district judge posts and said the seniority of officers within the HJS shall be determined through an annual 4-point roster, filled by all officers appointed in the particular year in the repeating sequence of two Regular Promotees, one Limited Departmental Competitive Examinations (LDCEs), and one Direct Recruits.

"That, only if the recruitment process is completed within the year after which it was initiated and no other appointments, from any of the three sources, have already taken place in respect of the recruitment initiated for that subsequent year, shall the officers belatedly so appointed be entitled to seniority as per the roster of the year in which recruitment was initiated," the bench said.

The issue of seniority and career progression of judicial officers across the country came up in a plea filed by the All India Judges Association (AIJA) in 1989.

On October 7, the top court referred issues related to career stagnation faced by lower judicial officers across the country to a five-judge Constitution bench. PTI PKS SJK PKS KVK KVK