Lawyers in Kerala have moved a resolution before the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA) opposing the recent Supreme Court judgment which held that judicial officers with seven years of experience as lawyers prior to joining judicial service are entitled to be appointed as a district judges under the Bar quota.

According to the resolution signed by 201 practicing lawyers, the decision of the Supreme Court in Rejanish KV v. K Deepa & Ors. has diluted the process of direct recruitment from the Bar to the post of District Judge which was, until now, reserved exclusively for practising advocates under Article 233(2) of the Constitution of India.

"The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while interpreting Article 233(2), equated judicial experience with experience at the Bar and held that a judicial officer possessing seven years of combined experience as an advocate and as a judicial officer was eligible for such direct recruitment," the resolution explained.

According to the lawyers, the Constitution intentionally demarcates two distinct streams for recruitment to the district judiciary - by promotion from subordinate judicial service or by direct recruitment from the Bar.

"A plain reading of Article 233 makes this distinction unmistakably clear. Clause (1) deals with appointments and promotions from among judicial officers in service, while clause (2) specifically provides for appointment of persons "not already in the service of the Union or of the State" who have been advocates or pleaders for at least seven years, upon recommendation by the High Court," the resolution stated.

Since the decision in the 2002 All India Judges' Association case, 25% of the posts of District Judge were reserved exclusively for advocates with at least seven years of continuous practice.

The judgment in Rejanish KV, the lawyers have contended, undermines the independence of the Bar by destabilising the 75:25 recruitment ratio between the judicial service and the Bar.

The resolution specifically mentioned an observation made by the Supreme Court in para 146 of the judgment that "the experience judicial officers gain while working as judges is much greater than that gained while working as advocates."

As per the resolution, this proposition diminishes the constitutional role and contribution of the Bar.

"The decision has profound implications for advocates across India, significantly curtailing opportunities for career advancement and diminishing the Bar's role in the judicial system," the resolution stated.

Further, the decision has already created practical difficulties for ongoing recruitments, it alleged.

On these grounds, the lawyers have requested the Executive Committee of the KHCAA to file an appropriate review or curative petition before the Supreme Court in the Rajinish KV case seeking reconsideration of the interpretation of Article 233(2) and restoration of the principle that 25 percent of District Judge posts be reserved exclusively for eligible practicing advocates. The lawyers have urged KHCAA to co-ordinate their efforts with bother Bar Associations and collectively present the issue to the Supreme Court.

They have also requested the KHCAA to approach the Supreme Court seeking permission to continue the ongoing recruitment process to the Kerala district judiciary.