The central government of India is reportedly on the brink of furthering its initiative to establish an All India Judicial Service (AIJS), designed in the same vein as the central civil services. This reform is aimed at centrally managing the recruitment of judges for all states, a process that until now has been conducted separately by each state.
About AIJS
The AIJS is anticipated to significantly streamline the process of recruiting judges at both additional district judge and district judge levels. Up to this point, these roles have been filled by individual states. However, this proposed reform would mean a centralized recruitment process akin to the one carried out by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). Successful candidates would then be assigned to their respective states.
History of AIJS Proposals
The idea for AIJS was initially proposed in the 14th report of the Law Commission back in 1958. The report called for a statutory or constitutional body like the UPSC to conduct a standardized, centralized exam to recruit and train judges. In 1978, the Law Commission Report shed light on delays and backlog of cases in the lower courts, reiterating the need for AIJS. Moreover, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice endorsed the idea of a pan-Indian judicial service in its 15th Report in 2006.
Supreme Court’s Stand on AIJS
In 1992, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to establish an AIJS in response to the All India Judges’ Association v. The Union of India case. The following year, however, the Supreme Court left the final decision to the Centre. In 2017, the Supreme Court reinforced the need for a Central Selection Mechanism and recommended a common examination as opposed to separate state exams.
Benefits Of AIJS
The introduction of AIJS could result in a more efficient subordinate judiciary and a more consistent training programme across states. Moreover, it might improve India’s Ease of Doing Business ranking by offering more efficient dispute resolution – a key factor in these rankings. The AIJS also holds potential to increase representation from marginalized sections of society, attracting a wider pool of talent, and addressing issues such as corruption and nepotism within the lower judiciary.
Criticisms Against AIJS
Some argue that a centralised recruitment process infringes upon the powers of individual states, granted by the Constitution, and fails to address unique state-specific concerns. Concerns arise around language and representation as judicial business is conducted in regional languages, which may be affected by central recruitment. Furthermore, local reservation based on caste and for rural candidates or linguistic minorities could be diluted in a central test.
Current Appointment Method And Constitutional Provision For Change
Currently, Articles 233 and 234 of the Indian Constitution hold jurisdiction over the appointment of district judges, placing this responsibility within the domain of each state. The appointment of Supreme Court and High Court judges, along with the transfer of judges between High Courts, is governed by Articles 124, 217 and 222 of the Constitution of India. These appointments are made by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice and other judges. However, the 42nd Constitutional amendment in 1976 provides the possibility for Parliament to enact a law creating an AIJS.
Way Forward
With a high number of pending cases, it is essential to establish a recruitment system that can recruit efficient judges in larger numbers for quicker case resolution. However, consensus needs to be built and decisive steps towards the AIJS need to be taken before it becomes part of the legislative framework.