Judicial Transparency - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court modified judicial service rules, increasing the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) quota for District Judge promotions from 10% to 25%. It reduced the required experience for LDCE eligibility to 3 years as Civil Judge (Senior Division) and mandated 10% accelerated promotions for Civil Judges (Junior Division). The Court also reinstated a 3-year minimum Bar practice requirement for Civil Judge (Junior Division) aspirants, counting from provisional enrollment. Vacancies under LDCE will be filled via regular promotion if unfilled. States must amend rules within three months to comply. The judgment aims to incentivize merit while ensuring judicial efficiency. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a series of interlocutory applications (IAs) filed in t...

The Supreme Court critically examined the procedure for designation of Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, highlighting issues with interviews, point-based evaluation, and secret ballot voting. It emphasized transparency, objectivity, and uniformity in the designation process and referred the matter to the Chief Justice for reconsideration. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around the process of designating Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, as interpreted and modified by the Supreme Court in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) and subsequent judgments. The issue arose when concerns were raised about the effectiveness and fairness of the guidelines laid down in *Indira Jaising-1* and *Indira Jaising-2*, particularly afte...

Tag: Judicial Transparency

Big Win for Judges: Supreme Court Reduces Experience Needed for Higher Judicial Posts

Supreme Court Reforms Senior Advocate Selection: Orders Fresh Rules for Senior Advocate Designation