Gauhati High Court seeks State reply in challenge to 35 years minimum age for appointment as District Judge

The Gauhati High Court on Friday gave the State three weeks to file its reply in a writ petition challenging the constitutionality of Assam's rules for appointment of Grade 1 judicial officers [Pooja Agarwal v. State of Assam and anr]..A Bench of Chief Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Soumitra Saikia was hearing a plea challenging the minimum age of 35 for appointment as district judges as provided in the Assam Judicial Service Rules of 2003.The petitioner, advocate Pooja Agarwal, stated that the said minimum age criteria is illegal as neither the Constitution nor the rules in other States provide for the same..Rule 7 of the Assam Judicial Service Rules provides that for direct recruitment, among other qualifications, the candidate must be at least 35 years of age, but under 45. This stipulation, the petitioner argued, is "contrary to Article 233 of the Constitution of India which clearly provides that no person shall be eligible to be appointed as a District Judge if he has been for not less than 7 years an advocate or pleader." Article 233 clarifies that no age criteria has been provided and the only eligibility criteria given is that the candidate needs to have seven years of practice as an advocate, it was stated. Arguing that there is "no rationale" behind this Rule, the petitioner stated that the minimum age requirement is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution "as it leads to discrimination on the basis of age as the law has been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a catena of cases."Moreover, the said requirement even "precludes otherwise qualified candidates possessing the requisite experience from appointment to the Grade I post," the plea added..The petitioner highlighted how, in the ordinary career of a law graduate, they would have completed the seven years of practice needed for district judges by age 31. By age 35, they would be eligible for appointment as High Court judges, having completed the minimum 10-year experience needed."It is highly unreasonable that the minimum experience to be appointed as a District Judge is more than that required to be appointed as a High Court Judge," the petitioner claimed, adding that the State's rules act as a bar and "disqualifies the candidate from competing inspite of possessing the requisite experience."The Assam Rules effectively mean that candidates in Delhi and Karnataka have longer tenures with the judiciary, it was pointed out..Stating that the Rule amounts to a complete violation of constitutional and fundamental rights, the petition called for it to be struck down by the Court. It prayed that the respondents be directed to show cause as to why this should not be the case."Interference by way of judicial review in the instant matter is highly warranted since outcome of this petition has effect on the life of a number of people who are aspiring to be appointed as Grade I Judicial Officers," the plea concluded.