Most States, HCs reject Centre's idea of common Judicial Services
text_fields
New Delhi: The Union government told Parliament that most states and High Courts in the country disagreed with its proposal to establish the All India Judicial Services (AIJS).
On Friday, the government added that those against the proposal reasoned that AIJS would create "chaos and instability" in the administration of justice to tribes, issues with the local language, erosion of the Constitution's federal structure etc., The Indian Express reported.
AJIS is a national level recruitment process for district judges by the Union Public Service Commission, which the government proposed to strengthen the justice delivery system. But the power to appoint lower court judges rests on the states, under the Constitution. They conduct their own examinations consulting the high court-based vacancies to appoint lower court judges, but AJIS will dilute states' power.
The Union Ministry of Law and Justice said in a reply that only the states of Haryana and Mizoram and high courts of Tripura and Sikkim favoured the government's 2015 proposal to create AJIS. The eight states of Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Punjab has written the union government opposing the proposal.
When five states sought changes in the proposal, 13 didn't respond. When 13 high courts opposed the proposal, six- Allahabad, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Uttarakhand, Manipur- sought changes. Madhya Pradesh and Gauhati did not respond.
The objected high courts were Andhra Pradesh, Bombay, Delhi, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Madras, Patna, Punjab & Haryana, Calcutta, Jharkhand, Rajasthan and Orissa; the ministry informed the Parliament.
The ministry further said that Arunachal Pradesh reasoned since it is purely a tribal state with distinct customs and ethos, modes of rendering justice vary from tribe to tribe. Therefore, a common judicial service could create instability. Among those states that sought amendments, Bihar demanded big.
Chhattisgarh wants only 15 per cent of vacancies at the level of Additional District Judge and above the Bar to be filled up through AJIS.
Odisha insisted on a minimum experience of ten years and an upper age limit of forty years to appoint judges.
Among opposing high courts, Bombay High Court cited a 2014 full court resolution that rejected AIJS. Calcutta and Punjab & Haryana high courts argued dilution of federal structure. The latter replied that AIJS would completely oust the control and supervision of the district court vested with the High Court under Article 235 of the Constitution.
But the Union government is expected to table the proposal again before a meeting of law ministers of all the states, which the Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju had hinted in November.
In August 2017, the Supreme Court took up AIJS suo motu under Chief Justice of India JS Khehar.
It informed all states that the move was only to ensure the timely filing of vacancies and would never tamper with the federal structure. States of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Uttarakhand had opposed it then.