District Judge Direct Appointment | 7 Year Practice Mandate Not Fulfilled If There's Break In Practice : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court considered eligibility criteria for direct recruitment of district judges by reference to the statutory requirement of seven years’ practice at the bar. The bench addressed whether cumulative years that include intermittent breaks in practice (for instance, periods of judicial employment, alternate service, or other interruptions) can be aggregated to meet the seven-year threshold. The Court held that entitlement to claim seven years of practice depends on continuous and qualifying practice as envisaged by the recruitment rules; a break in active practice may disentitle an applicant from relying on earlier years unless the law or rules expressly permit aggregation. The decision clarifies the evidentiary approach and signals strict scrutiny of service records and dates when determining eligibility for bar-quota direct appointments.