Case Summary
Rejanish K.V., a Kerala lawyer with over seven years of bar experience, applied for direct recruitment as a district judge under Article 233(2) of the Constitution. While the selection was pending, he was appointed as a Munsiff-Magistrate in December 2017. In August 2019, his district judge appointment came through, but fellow candidate K. Deepa challenged it, arguing he was no longer a practising advocate but a judicial officer. The Kerala High Court, relying on the 2020 Dheeraj Mor precedent, set aside his appointment. Rejanish appealed to the Supreme Court, which referred the matter to a five-judge Constitution Bench. The Bench delivered its landmark judgment on October 9, 2025, overruling Dheeraj Mor and expanding eligibility criteria.


Status or Result
The Supreme Court Constitution Bench held that judicial officers with a combined experience of seven years or more as advocates and/or judicial officers are eligible for direct recruitment as district judges under the bar quota. Eligibility is to be determined at the time of application. The Court overruled Dheeraj Mor v. High Court of Delhi (2020) and ordered states to frame rules accordingly. The ruling applies prospectively to future appointments.


Key Disputes
Whether judicial officers who had previously practised as advocates for at least seven years are eligible for direct recruitment as district judges under the bar quota; whether eligibility should be assessed at the time of application, appointment, or both; and whether the 2020 Dheeraj Mor precedent correctly interpreted Article 233(2) of the Constitution.


Social Impact
The verdict sparked significant controversy in legal circles. Over 200 Kerala lawyers passed a resolution opposing the judgment, arguing it undermines bar independence and destabilises the 75:25 recruitment ratio between judicial service promotions and bar direct recruitment. The Bar warned the ruling dilutes bar quota opportunities for young lawyers. The Supreme Court itself later expressed concern about potential unintended consequences. The case represents a major shift in India's district judiciary recruitment landscape.


Adapted Novels (1)
Published at Jun 20, 2026, 0 comments
    Case Comments (0)

    No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * *