The Supreme Court of India on 26 February 2026 heard a batch of review petitions and connected matters concerning eligibility conditions for appointment to entry-level judicial service posts, particularly the requirement of a minimum of three years’ practice as an advocate.

The matter was taken up by a Special Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice A. G. Masih, which orally expressed serious reservations about the continuance of the three-year practice requirement.

During the hearing, the Bench noted that the impugned condition has had an unintended and disproportionate impact on women aspirants, creating anxiety and uncertainty among young law graduates. The Court observed that social realities such as expectations relating to marriage, caregiving and family responsibilities—often make it difficult for women candidates to complete a mandatory three-year period of practice at the Bar, thereby effectively excluding many meritorious women from judicial service recruitment.

The Bench further remarked that the rule results in a three-year vacuum in recruitment, depriving the judiciary of capable candidates at an early stage and potentially weakening the talent pipeline. It was observed that the condition also automatically excludes fresh law graduates, preventing them from entering the judicial service directly after completing their legal education, despite being otherwise eligible and competent.

Expressing concern over the narrowing of the recruitment pool, the Court indicated that such eligibility criteria may run counter to the objective of ensuring diversity, inclusivity and merit-based selection in the subordinate judiciary.

In the course of the hearing, the Bench also suggested systemic reforms to address procedural bottlenecks at the Bar. It orally observed that Bar Councils should consider issuing licences to newly enrolled advocates within three months of verification, so that administrative delays do not further compound the difficulties faced by young aspirants.

The Court sought responses from the Registrars General of various High Courts on the issues raised in the review petitions, particularly on the justification, impact and continued necessity of the three-year practice requirement.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on 9 March 2026, when the Court is expected to consider the responses and take the issue forward.

The proceedings are being closely watched, as the outcome is likely to have a significant bearing on judicial service recruitment policy, gender representation in the judiciary, and the broader question of access to judicial office for young law graduates.

Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Petitioner in person; Mr. Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Adv.; Mr. Deepak Yadav In Person, Adv.; Ms. Anjale Kumari, Adv.; Mr. Shailendra Mani Tripathi, Adv.; Ms. Pooja Shilpkar, Adv.; Mr. Manish Nagpal, Adv.; Mr. Aditya Yadav, Adv.; Mr. Sanjeev Malhotra, AOR; Ms. Pinky Anand, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Kunal Yadav, AOR; Mr. Samrat Pasriccha, Adv.; Ms. Adeti Salooja, Adv.; Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Adv.; Ms. Chanya Jaitly, Adv.; Ms. Nayoleeka Purty, Adv.; Mr. Kartikey Yadav, Adv.; Mr. Parth Yadav, Adv.; Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Adv.; Ms. Farhat Jahan Rehmani, AOR; Mr. Mohd. Faizan Khan, Adv.; Mr. Imran Ahmad, Adv.; Mr. Firoz Iqal Khan, Adv.; Mr. Monis Faridi, Adv.; Mr. Mohammad Danish, Adv.; Ms. Fatima Parveen, Adv.; Mrs. Muskan Ali, Adv.; Mrs. Nazma, Adv.; Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, AOR; Mrs. Santhanalakshmi, Adv.; Mr. A. Venayagam Balan, AOR; Mr. Gaurav Pal, Adv.; Mr. N Narasimha Murthy, Adv.; Mr. Md Mohsin, Adv.; Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR; Mr. Paras Chauhan, Adv.; Ms. Kuheli Mitra, Adv.; Mr. Navneet Singh, Adv.; Mr. Vishal Kumar Singh, Adv.; Mr. Gopal Kumar Sahu, Adv.; Mr. S.k.mehta, Adv.; Mr. Deependra Kumar Pathak, Adv.; Mr. Pravir Kumar Jain, AOR; Mrs. Amita Gupta, AOR; Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR; Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Manik Gupta, Adv.; Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR; Dr. Sandeep Singh, Adv.; Mr. Vikrant Rana, Adv.; Mr. Manmohan Sharma, Adv.;; Mr. Vinay Pal, Adv.; Mr. Prashant Malik, Adv.; Mr. Jayant Singh Raghav, Adv.; Mr. Srikrishna Kumar Yadav, Adv.; Ms. Ragini Kumari, Adv.; Ms. Megha Tolia, Adv.; Ms. Sara Chawala, Adv.; Ms. Shristy Sinha, Adv.; Mr. B.P. Patil, Sr. Adv.; K.V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, AOR; Pritama, Adv.; Shaivani Gupta, Adv.

For the Respondents: The respondents were represented by Mr. Ravi Raghunath, AOR, Mr. Namanjeet S. Bhatia, Advocate, Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR, Mr. Ankit Yadav, AOR, Ms. Gunjan Rathore, Advocate, Ms. Shivangi Gulati, Advocate, Mr. Chaitanya Sonkeria, Advocate, Ms. Aastha Harshwal, Advocate, Mr. Areeb Husain, Advocate, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR, Ms. Shreya Kasera, Advocate, Ms. Sunit Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Devashish Das, AOR, Mr. Divyakant Lahoti, AOR, Mr. Kartik Lahoti, Advocate, Ms. Akanksha Soni, Advocate, Ms. Shubheksha Dwivedi, Advocate, Ms. Vindhya Mehra, Advocate, Ms. Praveena Bisht, Advocate, Mr. Kumar Vinayakam Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Samridhi Bhatt, Advocate, Mr. Siddharth Tripathi, Advocate, Ms. A. Subhashini, AOR, Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR, Mr. Ajay Kumar, AOR, Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR, Mr. Abhaya Nath Das, Advocate, Ms. Sarita Verma, Advocate, Mr. Abhay Singh, Advocate, Mr. Gulam Rabbani, Advocate, Ms. Krishnika Chatterjee, Advocate, Mr. Hitesh C. Soni, Advocate, Ms. Vaishali H. Soni, Advocate, Mr. Kishor Kumar Mishra, Advocate, Dr. Aditya Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Vijay K. Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Swagoti Batchas, Advocate, Mr. Mohaan Sonowal, Advocate, Ms. Monica Goel, Advocate, Mr. V. K. Shukla, Advocate, Mr. Nitish Pande, Advocate, Mr. Gourav Dixit, Advocate, Mr. T. V. Ratnam, AOR, Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR, Ms. Arushi Kulshrestha, Advocate, Ms. Mrinmoyee Das, Advocate, Ms. G. Indira, AOR, Mr. Anandh Kannan N., AOR, Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR, Mr. Shreyash Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Suresh Shambhuprasad Kanojia, Advocate, Mr. Amit Chandramohan Jha, Advocate, Mr. Ankit Aggarwal, Advocate, Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR, Mr. C. Raghavendren, Advocate, Mrs. C. Rubavathi, Advocate, Mr. Devansh Tyagi, Advocate, Mr. M. A. Chinnasamy, AOR, Mr. Ajit Pudussery, AOR, Mr. Raj Kumar Mehta, AOR, Ms. Adviteeya, Advocate, Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR, Mr. Devesh Maurya, Advocate, Ms. Sheetal Kandpal, Advocate, Mr. R. D. Maurya, Advocate, Ms. Mini Gangadharan, Advocate, Mr. Sunni Kapoor, Advocate, Mr. Loveli Tyagi, Advocate, Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR, Mr. T. Harish Kumar, AOR, Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR, Ms. Manpreet Kaur, Advocate, Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, AOR, Ms. Kumud Lata Das, AOR, Ms. Rubina Jawed, Advocate, Mr. Harsh Ajay Singh, Advocate, Mr. Siddhant Narayan Das, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR, Mrs. Vandna Beri, Advocate, Mr. Kanishk Mor, Advocate, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR, Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR, Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR, Ms. Vanshika Verma, Advocate, Mrs. Sujithra, Advocate, Mr. Rajiv Mehta, AOR, Mr. Abhisth Kumar, AOR, Ms. Anjali Rajput, Advocate, Mr. Arun K. Sinha, AOR, Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR, Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, AOR, Mr. P. I. Jose, AOR, Mr. Anupam Mishra, Advocate, Ms. P. S. Chandralekha, Advocate, Mr. P. V. Yogeswaran, AOR, Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR, Mr. Haresh Raichura, AOR, Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR, Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR, Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, AOR, Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR, Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR, M/s Parekh & Co., AOR, Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR, Mr. K. M. Nataraj, Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Nalin Kohli, Advocate, Mr. B. K. Satija, Advocate, Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Advocate, Mr. Raman Yadav, Advocate