Supreme Court Upholds Verdict on Judicial Exams Eligibility

The Supreme Court upheld its decision requiring law graduates to have a minimum of three years of practice before appearing for judicial services exams, rejecting a plea to allow judicial officers to qualify based on their experience. The Court warned that amending it would open a Pandora’s box.

The Supreme Court has firmly upheld its landmark decision enforcing a minimum three-year practice requirement for law graduates prior to taking judicial services exams. It refused a plea that sought to modify this standard to allow serving judicial officers to qualify through their judicial experience.

In a May verdict, Chief Justice B R Gavai's bench prohibited fresh law graduates from entry-level judicial service exams, mandating a three-year practice period as lawyers, although it agreed to count internships towards this experience. The plea, raised by a Madhya Pradesh judge, requested that judicial officers' experience be considered valid.

However, the bench, including CJI and Justice K Vinod Chandran, unequivocally dismissed this proposal. The decision stands firm, with the Chief Justice cautioning that any modification could lead to extensive complications, metaphorically described as opening a “Pandora’s box.”