Judicial Officers' Experience Greater Than That Of Practising Advocates: Supreme Court In District Judge Recruitment Case

The Supreme Court, while dealing with disputes over eligibility and comparative advantage between judicial officers and practising advocates for district judge vacancies, observed that experience gained by serving judicial officers may be of a different and often greater practical value than that of advocates. The Court analysed the nature of judicial experience, administrative responsibilities, and exposure to court management, contrasting it with advocacy experience in the adversarial role. The bench recognised that judicial officers’ experience—especially involving presiding over proceedings and administrative duties—can be decisive in recruitment contexts.