Case of Serving Judicial Officer of the Supreme Court Applying for District Judge Qualification

In April 2025, a Public Interest Litigation was filed before the Supreme Court of India by Advocate Ananya Sharma, challenging the eligibility of Mr. Vikram Rathore, a serving Judicial Officer (Registrar) at the Supreme Court, who had applied for the District Judge (Entry Level) examination conducted by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The petitioner argued that Rathore’s current post granted him undue access to legal resources and inside knowledge, creating an uneven playing field and violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The respondents contended that no rule explicitly barred such a candidacy and that Rathore was willing to resign upon selection. The case raised questions about transparency, meritocracy, and potential conflicts of interest in judicial recruitment.

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that no statutory provision or service rule prohibited an incumbent judicial officer from applying. However, it directed that if selected, Mr. Rathore must resign from his Supreme Court position before assuming the district judge role, and the recruiting High Court must maintain a transparent process to avoid any perception of bias.

Whether a serving Supreme Court judicial officer is eligible to compete for the post of District Judge, and if such participation breaches the principles of natural justice, fair competition, and equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.

The ruling sparked debate on the integrity of judicial recruitment. While some viewed it as affirming the right to career mobility for judicial officers, critics warned that it could erode public confidence in the impartiality of lower judiciary selections. The case prompted several High Courts to review their eligibility regulations to address potential conflicts of interest for sitting court staff.