Five-judge Constitution Bench to decide if issue of limited promotional avenues for entry-level judicial officers warrants reference to larger Bench

A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 14, 2025) said it would consider whether issues relating to the limited promotional avenues available to entry-level judicial officers should be referred to a larger Bench.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, K. Vinod Chandran, and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a plea filed by the All India Judges Association. The long-pending matter raises concerns over stagnation in career progression and disparities in pay and promotional opportunities among officers in the subordinate judiciary.

On October 7, the apex court had referred questions relating to career stagnation in the lower judiciary to a five-judge Constitution Bench for authoritative determination.

During the brief hearing, senior advocate R. Basant pointed out that two other Constitution Benches had already taken views on similar issues. “Two Constitution Benches have taken a view. So we have to see if a five-judge Bench can go into this. Your Lordship may consider constituting a larger Bench because the entire exercise cannot be rendered futile,” he submitted.

Senior advocate Siddharth Bhatnagar, appearing as amicus curiae, informed the Bench that several intervention applications had been filed—both supporting and opposing the proposal to grant judicial officers enhanced promotional opportunities. He had earlier suggested reserving a certain percentage of posts in the cadre of Principal District Judges for officers promoted from the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) and Civil Judge cadres.

Taking note of the range of submissions, the Bench said it would take a comprehensive view of the issue of career stagnation in the lower judiciary. It appointed advocates Mayuri Raghuvanshi and Manu Krishnan as nodal counsels for the respective sides to coordinate written submissions and prepare compilations. The court directed that written submissions be filed by October 27 and scheduled oral arguments for October 28 and 29.

Earlier, Chief Justice Gavai had observed that a “comprehensive solution” was needed to address the limited promotional avenues available to those entering the judiciary at the lowest level. The court had also noted “divergent views” expressed by several High Courts and State governments in their responses to notices issued on the petitions.

The court had flagged the “anomalous situation” prevailing in many States, where judicial officers who begin their careers as JMFCs often retire without ever reaching the post of Principal District Judge (PDJ), let alone elevation to the High Court Bench.