Archive · 15 Aug 2025
Supreme Court Sticks to Law Practice Rule for Judicial Exams
The Supreme Court decided not to change its rule that people need to have practiced law for three years before they can take the test to become a judge.
A judge from Madhya Pradesh wanted the court to count their time as a judge towards this requirement, but the court said no.
The court felt that making changes to the rule would create problems.
Supreme Court maintained the three-year law practice requirement for judicial service exams.
The court refused to modify its previous ruling.
The decision was made in response to a plea from a judge in Madhya Pradesh.
The judge requested that their experience as a judicial officer be considered.
The court believes changing the rule would cause complications.
- Who
- The Supreme Court and a judge from Madhya Pradesh.
- What
- The Supreme Court upheld the three-year law practice requirement for judicial service exams.
- When
- Thursday
- Where
- New Delhi, India
- Why
- The court believes modifying the verdict would open complications.
Judicial Officers
Supreme Court
Eligibility for Judicial Service Exams
Judicial Officers
Allow judicial officers to use their experience towards eligibility.
Supreme Court
Maintain the three-year practice rule, excluding judicial officer experience.
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Requirement
- 3 years law practice
- Subject
- Judicial Services Examinations
- Petitioner
- Judge from Madhya Pradesh
