Judicial Service Recruitment | Supreme Court Requests High Courts To Notify An Authority Who Can Address Doubts & Grievances Of Candidates

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has flagged concerns about the absence of a designated authority by the High Courts which can be approached by the candidates of judicial services examinations to seek clarification in case of any doubt.

By placing reliance on the report of Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy titled “Discretion & Delay- Challenges of Becoming a District & Civil Judge", the Bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra sought for the establishment of the designated authority for a given recruitment process with clearly defined roles, functions and responsibilities so that candidates can approach such a designated authority to seek clarification in case of any doubt, and would assuage the anxiety of the candidates to a considerable extent.

"It would be apposite at this stage to note a few of the recommendations flagged in the December,2018 Report of Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy titled “Discretion & Delay- Challenges of Becoming a District & Civil Judge” which examined the judicial Service Rules of 29 States. The absence of a designated authority that can be approached by the candidates is flagged in the said report. As this appears to be a valid concern, the concerned High Court should notify a designated authority for a given recruitment process with clearly defined roles, functions and responsibilities. The candidates can approach such a designated authority to seek clarification in case of any doubt and this would assuage the anxiety of the candidates to a considerable extent.", the court said.

Other Suggestions Made By Court With Regards To Judicial Services Examinations

The court put forth another suggestion of providing a basic outline of the syllabus for the proposed test to help candidates from diverse backgrounds plan and prepare for the proposed examination even before the examination notification is released. 

The recruitment process must adhere to the timeline but if there is any special and unavoidable exigency, the stakeholders should be kept informed with due promptitude, the court added.

The court directed that the judgment be brought to the attention of the Chief Justice of all High Courts.

Also From Judgment: Judicial Service | 'High Score In Written Exam Alone Doesn't Determine Merit' : Supreme Court Upholds Minimum Mark Criteria For Interview

Judicial Service | Prescribing Minimum Qualifying Marks For Interview Doesn't Contravene Judgment In All India Judges Case (2002): Supreme Court

Case Title: ABHIMEET SINHA & ORS. VERSUS HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 350

Click here to read/download the judgment