High Courts Divided Over Relaxing Three-Year Practice Rule for Specially Abled Judicial Aspirants

Several High Courts have submitted their views to the Supreme Court regarding whether the mandatory three-year practice requirement for judicial service should be relaxed for specially abled candidates.

While the Delhi, Gauhati, and Punjab and Haryana High Courts supported a uniform eligibility criterion to maintain judicial competence, others suggested flexibility.

The Meghalaya High Court proposed reducing the practice period or granting age relaxations, while the Tripura High Court supported dispensing with the requirement entirely for such candidates.

Conversely, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court argued that while suitability can be adjusted, basic eligibility must remain uniform to avoid similar demands from other categories.

[Bhumika Trust v. UOI]