Judicial Appointment Policy Debate: Litigation Experience Requirement and Gender Representation in Judiciary

Indian Express - Opinion · 12 Mar 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance

The Supreme Court's requirement of three years litigation experience for district judge appointments disproportionately impacts women lawyers due to societal constraints, raising concerns about gender representation in the judiciary.

Key points

Supreme Court's 2025 verdict upheld the requirement of three years litigation experience for district judge appointments, citing concerns about judicial maturity and courtroom decorum among fresh graduates.

CJI Surya Kant criticized this policy's adverse impact on women lawyers, noting familial and societal pressures often force career breaks that prevent them from completing the mandatory practice period.

[GS2-Social Justice] Current judiciary statistics show only 5% women in SC, 10% in HCs, and 37% in district courts, highlighting systemic underrepresentation despite women forming 60% of judicial officer candidates.

All India Judges Association case (1994) had recommended replacing practice requirements with two years judicial training, but training academies remain inadequate for practical skill development.

Gender-sensitive infrastructure deficiencies like lack of private washrooms and sexual harassment protections (as noted in Rajeeb Kalita case) further deter women from pursuing judicial careers.

[GS2-Governance] Comparative analysis shows UK (5-year practice) and Germany's civil-law model achieve better gender representation than India's 3-year rule, while South Africa's constitutional mandate ensures 52% women in lower judiciary.

Judicial training gap persists as academies focus on theoretical recycling rather than practical skills like evidence appreciation and socio-economic demographic analysis required for sound judgments.

Way Forward: India should implement gender-sensitive judicial training programs, establish childcare support for women lawyers, and consider South Africa's constitutional model for equitable representation while maintaining competency standards.

Key terms

All India Judges Association Case (1994)

A landmark Supreme Court case that addressed judicial reforms based on the Shetty Commission recommendations, proposing replacement of mandatory practice requirements with intensive judicial training to improve competency in lower judiciary appointments.

Article 21

The constitutional right to life and personal liberty, relevant here as judicial appointment policies impact women's right to equal opportunity in public employment, a dimension recognized under expanded interpretations of this article.

District Judiciary

The first level of judicial hierarchy handling original jurisdiction cases, where appointment policies significantly impact access to justice and diversity, making it constitutionally crucial for GS2 governance questions.

Shetty Commission

The First National Judicial Pay Commission (1999) that recommended structural reforms in judicial appointments and service conditions, particularly advocating for better training over rigid practice requirements.