A proposal for the creation of AIJS was initially endorsed by the Committee of Secretaries in November 2012. However, subsequent discussions at the Chief Ministers and Chief Justices conferences in 2013 and 2015 revealed divergent opinions among state governments and High Courts
A properly framed All India Judicial Service is important to strengthen overall justice delivery system, stated Government of India in Parliament today. However, it also stated that due to existing divergence of opinion amongst the major stakeholders (including state governments), at present, there is no consensus on the proposal for setting up an All India Judicial Service.
The Ministry of Law and Justice responded today to inquiries posed in the Lok Sabha regarding the establishment of an All India Judicial Service (AIJS) and vacancies within the judiciary.
In a comprehensive statement, Minister of State Arjun Ram Meghwal delineated the historical journey and current status of the AIJS proposal. Article 312 of the Constitution allows for the establishment of the AIJS at the level of District Judges exclusively, excluding any positions lower than this rank. The government believes that a well-structured AIJS is pivotal to fortifying the justice delivery system, providing opportunities for proficient legal minds nationwide, and ensuring representation for marginalized segments of society.
A proposal for the creation of AIJS was initially endorsed by the Committee of Secretaries in November 2012. However, subsequent discussions at the Chief Ministers and Chief Justices conferences in 2013 and 2015 revealed divergent opinions among state governments and High Courts. While some favored the AIJS creation, others advocated modifications or were outright against its formation.
The Minister highlighted that despite numerous discussions and inclusion in various high-level conferences between 2015 and 2022, a consensus on the establishment of AIJS remains elusive due to conflicting viewpoints among stakeholders.
Regarding reservations in Higher Judicial Services, the Constitution does not grant the central government a role in District Courts/Subordinate judiciary appointments. The responsibility lies with respective State Governments and High Courts, empowered by constitutional provisions to frame rules governing reservations and recruitments.
As of December 11, 2023, the Supreme Court is operating at full capacity, with no vacancies. However, among High Courts, there are 324 vacant judge positions against the sanctioned strength of 1114 judges. Furthermore, the District and Subordinate Judiciary witness a notable shortage, with 5443 vacancies out of a sanctioned strength of 25439 judicial officers.
The Minister's response elucidated the complex landscape surrounding the AIJS proposal and highlighted the challenges in achieving unanimity among stakeholders. The government continues to navigate these complexities while addressing the pressing issue of vacancies within the judiciary.
Read more:
