SC refuses to modify verdict fixing minimum term of law practice to write judicial exam

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to modify its verdict fixing a minimum three-year law practice criterion for law graduates for appearing in entry level judicial services examinations, saying it will open “pandora’s box”.

The top court was hearing a plea of a judge from Madhya Pradesh seeking a modification in the verdict to permit serving judicial officers also to take up the exam by taking note of their experience as a judge. On May 20, a bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai barred fresh law graduates from appearing in entry level judicial services examination and fixed a minimum three-year law practice criteria.

Also read ‘Do SSC exams even have a point?’ Thousands affected by faulty centres, technical glitches, demand new vendor

The verdict said lawyers would have to practice law for three years before becoming eligible to take up the judicial services exam. It agreed to consider the three year experience of law graduates as law interns also. However, it did not consider the experience of three years as a judicial officer for enabling them to appear in the judicial services exam.

On Thursday, the bench comprising the CJI and Justice K Vinod Chandran refused to re-consider the experience as judicial officers for enabling them to take up fresh exams in other states. “What is wrong in Madhya Pradesh? … we will not modify this. This will open Pandora's box,” the CJI said while dismissing the plea.