What is the All India Judicial Service?

  • Article 312 of the Constitution provides for the establishment of an All-India Judicial Service (AIJS), along the lines of the central civil services.
  • If the Rajya Sabha declares through a resolution, supported by at least two-thirds of its present and voting members, that it is necessary or expedient to create a service in “national interest,” the Parliament “may by law provide for the creation of one or more all India services (including an all India judicial service) common to the Union and the States” and regulate the recruitment and service conditions of persons appointed to any such service.
  • However, Article 312 (2) states that the AIJS cannot include any post inferior to that of a district judge, as defined in Article 236. A district judge can include a city civil court judge, additional district judge, joint district judge, assistant district judge, chief judge of a small cause court, chief presidency magistrate, additional chief presidency magistrate, sessions judge, additional sessions judge, and assistant sessions judge.
  • Essentially, the AIJS seeks to centralise the recruitment of judges at the level of additional district judges and district judges for all states.

How will this differ from the present system of selection?

  • Articles 233 and 234 of the Constitution of India deal with the appointment of district judges and place it in the domain of the states.
  • The selection process is conducted by the State Public Service Commissions and the concerned High Court, since HCs exercise jurisdiction over the subordinate judiciary in the state. Panels of HC judges interview candidates after the exam and select them for appointment.
  • All judges of the lower judiciary up to the level of district judges are selected through the Provincial Civil Services (Judicial) exam. PCS (J) is commonly referred to as the judicial services exam.

Why has the AIJS been proposed?

  • The idea of a centralised judicial service was first deliberated in the Law Commission’s 1958 ‘Report on Reforms on Judicial Administration’.
  • It was to ensure an efficient subordinate judiciary to address structural issues such as varying pay and remuneration across states, filling vacancies faster, and ensuring standard training nationwide.
  • A statutory or constitutional body such as the UPSC to conduct a standard, centralised exam to recruit and train judges was discussed.
  • The idea was proposed again in the Law Commission Report of 1978, which discussed delays and arrears of cases in the lower courts.
  • In 2006, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice, in its 15th Report, supported the idea of a pan-Indian judicial service and also prepared a draft bill.

What did the SC rule?

  • In 1992, the SC in ‘All India Judges’ Association (1) v. UOI’ directed the Centre to set up an AIJS. However, in a 1993 review of the judgement, the court left the Centre at liberty to take initiatives on the issue.
  • In 2017, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the issue of appointment of district judges and mooted a “Central Selection Mechanism”.
  • Senior advocate Arvind Datar, who was the amicus curiae in the matter, circulated a concept note to all states that recommended conducting a common examination instead of separate state exams.
  • Based on the merit list, HCs would then hold interviews and appoint judges. Datar submitted that this would not change the constitutional framework or take away the powers of states or HCs.

Why hasn’t this been implemented yet?

  • The Centre took various steps towards the constitution of the AIJS, such as coming up with a “comprehensive proposal”, which was approved by the Committee of Secretaries in November 2012.
  • In April 2013, this proposal was included as an agenda item in the Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Court. However, it was agreed upon that the issue needs further deliberation. Subsequently, the views of state governments and HCs were sought on the proposal, but no consensus could be reached.
Way Forward- In March, when asked about AIJS’s implementation in the Lok Sabha, former Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said that owing to diverging opinions amongst the major stakeholders, “there is no consensus on the proposal for setting up an All India Judicial Service right now.” However, concerted efforts must continue to onboard all stakeholders on the issue of AIJS, going forward. Syllabus- GS-2; Judiciary Source- Indian Express