Domestic Violence Act India – legal rights, protection for women, and remedies under law

⚖️ Review Petition Against SC’s 3-Year Practice Rule for Judicial Services

Published: September 2025 | Category: Judicial Services Updates

A practicing advocate and judicial service aspirant Chandrasen Yadav has filed a
review petition against the Supreme Court judgment in All India Judges Assn. v. Union of India
(May 20, 2025). The Court had mandated 3 years of legal practice as a condition for appearing in
RJS, DJS, PCS(J) and other Judicial Services exams.

📜 The Supreme Court’s Direction

“All the High Courts and State Governments shall amend service rules so that candidates for Civil Judge (Junior Division) must have practiced for a minimum of 3 years. Certificates must be certified by a Principal Judicial Officer or a senior advocate (10+ years standing) duly endorsed.”

The Court believed judicial officers need practical courtroom exposure before assuming office:
“The judges, from the very first day, deal with life, liberty, property and reputation of litigants.”

⚖️ Petitioner’s Grounds

Violation of Articles 14 and 16 (right to equality and equal opportunity in public employment).
Arbitrary & unreasonable condition excluding fresh graduates (2023–25 batch).
Implementation should begin only from 2027 to avoid retrospective hardship.
Requirement of certification by senior lawyers with 10+ years’ standing adds hurdles.

📖 Shetty Commission’s Findings

The petitioner pointed to Clause 8.35 of Shetty Commission’s Recommendations:
If young and meritorious law graduates are given intensive post-selection training, the
3-year practice requirement may not be necessary.

The Commission itself acknowledged that modern legal education already provides practical exposure.

🚨 Impact on Aspirants

The review petition argues that the rule disproportionately harms women, first-generation lawyers, and candidates from weaker economic backgrounds who cannot sustain uncertain practice years before getting a stable judicial post.

📌 Related Resources

📘 For Monthly Current-affairs: Click Here
📚 To read more updates: Supreme Court Judgments Blog

✨ Want to master landmark cases & exam-specific notes?
👉 Check out our Complete Judiciary Notes here.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions on SC 3-Year Practice Rule

What is the Supreme Court’s 3-Year Practice Rule for judicial services?

On May 20, 2025, the Supreme Court directed that candidates must complete a minimum of 3 years of legal practice at the Bar before appearing for judicial service exams such as RJS, DJS, and PCS(J).

Who has filed the review petition against this rule?

The review petition was filed by advocate and judicial service aspirant Chandrasen Yadav, along with another petitioner, Chandra Sharma, challenging the Supreme Court’s decision.

What constitutional rights are cited in the petition?

The petition argues that Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution — equality before law and equal opportunity in public employment — are violated by the mandatory 3-year practice requirement.

How does the rule affect recent law graduates?

Graduates from 2023–2025 prepared under the old eligibility criteria. The sudden enforcement of the 3-year rule excludes them unfairly, violating the principles of fairness and legitimate expectation.

What did the Shetty Commission recommend on this issue?

The 1999 Shetty Commission suggested 3 years of practice but also noted that if intensive post-selection training is provided, mandatory practice may not be necessary for entry into judicial service.

Why is the rule seen as problematic for some aspirants?

The petition highlights that women, first-generation lawyers, and economically weaker candidates may struggle to sustain themselves during 3 years of uncertain practice before securing a judicial post.