It is a proposed cadre of judicial officers at the lower levels (below High Courts) recruited through an open competitive national level exam.
It is proposed to be an All India Service under Article 312 where the government is in the process of finalising a bill to establish an all-India judicial service to recruit officers for subordinate courts through an entrance test.
Q. What is background for it?
The idea of formation of AIJS first came out as a proposal by the Law Commission of India in 1958.
In 1976 by Swaran Singh Committee’s recommendations , Article 312 (which deals with creation of new All India Service (AIS)) was modified to include the judicial services, but it excluded anyone below the rank of district judge.
The Chief Justices Conferences in 1961, 1963 and 1965 favoured the creation of an AIJS, but the proposal had to be abandoned after some States and High Courts opposed it.
The government has in the past proposed an all-India judicial service test to be conducted the UPSC. But nine high courts had opposed the proposal to have an all-India service for the lower judiciary.
Eight others had sought changes in the proposed framework and only two supported the idea. The current government has given a fresh push to the long-pending proposal to set up the new service to have a separate cadre for lower judiciary in the country.
Under it District judges will get recruited centrally through an all-India examination and allocated to each State along the lines of the AIS.
Q. What is Need for All India Judicial Service?
Reduce pendency of cases: Streamlined and objective recruitment process would ensure regular stream of good quality judicial officers for vacant posts, which would reduce pendency of cases as present which is according to National Judicial data grid is 3.5 crore.
Provide objectivity in recruitment: Open competitive exam would bring objectivity in the recruitment process of judiciary by reducing discretion of selection panel.
Dearth of good quality judicial officers: The ever continuing decline in their quality will delay delivery of justice, increase pendency of cases, impair quality of judgments, and in turn affect the competence of higher judiciary as well.
Makes services attractive : State judicial services are not attractive for ‘best talents’ due to low salaries, rewards and compensations by the state governments.
Lack of specialized state training institutions: Adjudication is a specialization which requires state of the art training institutes and professors but state institutes don’t allow such exposure to interns.
Recognize meritocracy : It will ensure a transparent and efficient method of recruitment to attract the best talent in India’s legal profession.
Increases Efficiency: A well-organized judicial service can attract talent from law schools and young, well-informed judicial officers at the level of additional district judge will make a difference.
Q. What are some of issues in it?
Bureaucratization : Lead to bureaucratization and centralisation of Judiciary
Local language issue: Courts up to District and Sessions Judge transact their business in State language and proposed AIJS officers would find difficulty with local language, thus hampering dispensation of justice.
Undermines Independence of judiciary : If the control over state judiciary is transferred to Union government, through AIJS, by removing control of High Court as provided under Article 235 currently, independence of judiciary would be undermined.
Problem of local laws and customs: AIJS does not take into account the problem of local laws, practices and customs which vary widely across States, thus increasing the costs of training for judges selected through the mechanism.
Uncertainty regarding posts to be covered: There is lack of consensus and uncertainty of the level up to which posts should be included in Indian Judicial Service.
Discriminatory for weaker sections: A “national exam” risks shutting out those from less privileged backgrounds from being able to enter the judicial services.
Might not have any substantial impact :
It addresses neither the problem of disproportionately low pay nor unavailability of adequate judicial infrastructure (including courts or training of officers) in states nor the lack of career advancement.
Moreover, there is low district judge representation in the High Courts, as less than a third of seats in the High Courts are filled by judges from the district cadre. The rest are appointed directly from the Bar.
