Supreme Court: Experience as Judicial Officer Doesn’t Fulfill 3-Year Practice Rule for Judiciary Exams

The Supreme Court has clarified that work as a judicial officer (e.g., munsif, magistrate) does not count toward the mandatory 3-year legal practice requirement for Civil Judge (Junior Division) exams.

The Court ruled that only independent practice as an advocate qualifies, emphasising a strict interpretation of the eligibility criteria. This clarification reinforces the Court’s 20 May 2025 ruling that reinstated the 3-year practice rule for aspiring judges.

The bench rejected petitions from judicial officers seeking to count their service experience as equivalent to advocacy practice. It warned that such a move could “open a Pandora’s box”, prompting demands from other professional roles to be treated as equivalent.