In a packed courtroom on Wednesday, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court finally settled one of the judiciary’s longest-running internal disputes - how to decide seniority among District Judges recruited through different routes. The Bench, led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, unveiled a uniform nationwide roster system, calling it necessary to end decades of “heartburn” and “uneven practices” that varied widely from State to State.
Background
The controversy goes back to 1989, when the All India Judges Association first approached the apex court seeking structural reforms in the judicial service. Over the years, the Higher Judicial Service (HJS) - essentially the cadre of District Judges - has taken officers from three distinct entry points:
- Regular Promotees (RPs) – judges rising from the lower courts,
- Limited Departmental Competitive Exam recruits (LDCEs), and
- Direct Recruits (DRs) – typically practising advocates.
Supreme Court Questions Centre’s Tribunal Reforms Act After Repeated Violations of Judicial
Each group has long felt the other enjoys an unfair advantage. Officers who climbed the ladder from the lower courts often complained that younger direct recruits overtook them quickly. Meanwhile, direct recruits argued that once they enter the HJS, their earlier background should not be held against them. Over time, States also adopted different roster patterns, some giving the first few seniority positions to promotees, others to LDCEs. This, according to the court, had created “an affront to uniformity.”
Court’s Observations
The Bench noted with some frankness that emotional grievance alone cannot dictate service rules. “Perceived heartburn without something more in the form of a legal claim… cannot justify artificial classification,” the Court observed.
Delhi High Court Orders Permanent Ban on Fake YouTube Channel Impersonating TV Today
The judges also rejected the argument that long years of service as a Civil Judge should automatically improve seniority once a person enters the District Judge cadre. Once officers join the HJS, the Bench said, “they lose the birthmark of their source.” In other words, the system should treat them as equals from that point forward.
Addressing the fear that younger direct recruits were overshadowing older promotees, the Court pointed out that the situation varies widely across India, and in several States, promotees actually dominate key positions. “There is no common malady,” the bench remarked, brushing aside claims of nationwide imbalance.
One striking moment came when the CJI used an everyday analogy to explain the issue: “Imagine the HJS as a destination. Some reach by flight, some by train, some on foot. That alone cannot justify preference in seniority once everyone arrives.” The courtroom chuckled lightly, but the point was unmistakably clear.
Still, the Court acknowledged that delays in recruitment - especially for direct recruits and LDCE officers - often distort seniority cycles. To address this, the judges crafted a nuanced exception: if recruitment from any source concludes the following year, those officers may still be slotted into the previous year’s roster, provided the next year’s process hasn’t begun.
Decision
Finally, the Supreme Court unveiled a simple but sweeping reform: a uniform 4-point annual roster, repeating in this fixed sequence -
1. Regular Promotee
2. Regular Promotee
3. LDCE recruit
4. Direct recruit
Supreme Court Refuses to Cut 24% Interest in High-Risk Hotel Loan Case, Citing Borrower’s Repeated
This pattern will repeat every year for all States and Union Territories. Crucially, the Court clarified that merit - not past service in lower courts - will remain the basis for promotions to Selection Grade and Super Time Scale.
All States must amend their service rules within three months to integrate the new system. With this, the interlocutory application was disposed of.
Case Title: All India Judges Association & Others vs. Union of India & Others (2025)
Issue: Seniority Determination in Higher Judicial Service (HJS)
Court: Supreme Court of India, Constitution Bench (5 Judges).
Judgment Date: 19 November 2025
