Supreme Court Restores 3-Year Advocacy Experience Requirement for Judicial Service Entry

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Supreme Court Restores...

In All India Judges Association v. Union of India (2025), the Supreme Court, led by CJI BR Gavai, mandated a minimum of 3 years’ advocacy practice for candidates seeking entry-level judicial posts, restoring the pre-2002 requirement. The Court held that first-hand courtroom experience is crucial for judicial competence and cannot be replaced by academic knowledge or training. The requirement applies prospectively, exempting ongoing recruitment processes. Certificates from senior advocates and judicial officers will validate practice. The Court emphasized that fresh law graduates lacked adequate exposure, often leading to inefficiencies in the judiciary, and directed High Courts and State Governments to amend service rules accordingly.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

M/s Siddamsetty Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Katta Sujatha Reddy & Ors

In M/s Siddamsetty Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. Katta Sujatha Reddy & Ors., the Supreme Court recalled its earlier decision and restored the Telangana High Court’s judgment directing specific performance proportionate to the consideration paid for the sale of a property. The petitioner, having paid 90% of the sale consideration, sought specific performance after the... Read more » Read more »

Trust Without Liability: The Supreme Court Clarifies Interplay Of Trusts And Cheque Dishonour Complaints Under The NI Act

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Sankar Padam Thapa v. Vijaykumar Dineshchandra Agarwal (2025 INSC 1210) has conclusively addressed a long-standing ambiguity at the intersection of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the Indian Trusts Act, 1882. The Court was called upon to decide whether a complaint under... Read more »

Kirpal Singh Vs. Government of India, New Delhi & Ors

In Kirpal Singh v. Government of India, New Delhi & Ors, the Supreme Court condoned a 126-day delay in filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, holding that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, which excludes time spent before courts without jurisdiction, applies to Section 34. The appellant initially filed... Read more » Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.