Can munsiff become district judge through direct recruitment? Supreme Court refers issue to Constitution Bench

The Supreme Court on Tuesday referred to a Constitution Bench the question of whether a munsiff with seven years of practice as a lawyer can be directly recruited to the post of district judge [Rejanish KV v. K Deepa and Ors].

The direct recruitment route is generally open to practicing lawyers who have seven years of experience. The other recruitment route is for existing judicial officers, who may be promoted to the post of district judge.

The question of whether existing judicial officers can also avail the direct recruitment route arose in an appeal filed by one VK Rejanish. Rejanish was a practicing lawyer when he applied to be district judge, but had been appointed a munsiff by the time his district judge appointment came through.

A single-judge of the Kerala High Court set aside his appointment as a district judge in 2019 and the said ruling was confirmed by the Division Bench in 2020.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justices Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria today referred a batch of petitions including an appeal against the Kerala High Court's decision and review petitions against its own 2020 ruling in Dheeraj Mor to a Constitution Bench for an authoritative view on the matter.

A single-judge of the Kerala High Court had held that in view of the Supreme Court's ruling in Dheeraj Mor v. High Court of Delhi, Rejanish's appointment as a district judge was liable to set aside since he was not a practicing advocate at the time of his appointment.

In its 2020 verdict, however, the Division Bench also noted that the case raised a substantial question of law.

It observed that there may be several district judges who were recruited contrary to the law laid down in the Dheeraj Mor case since State rules framed prior to that judgment may allow for the direct recruitment of district judges who are not lawyers at the time of their appointment. The Division Bench pointed out that Kerala's rules permitted such appointments.

"A substantial question of law of general importance has arisen in the case which requires consideration by the Apex Court," the High Court noted, while granting Rejanish leave to file an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Rejanish subsequently filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, which issued notice in the matter and passed an interim stay on the High Court's verdict in 2021.

The Court reserved orders in the matter on July 28 before deciding to refer the case to a Constitution Bench today.

The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocates Anand Sanjay M. Nuli, DS Naidu, Jayant Bhushan, SP Chaly, Manish Singhvi, V Giri, Anil Kaushik, Menaka Guruswamy and Rajive Bhalla.

The respondents were represented by Senior Advocates CU Singh, Nidhesh Gupta, Jaideep Gupta, A Hariprasad and Shekhar G Devasa.

[Read Judgment]