Lok Sabha Question No. 5722 (UNSTARRED), answered on 2026-03-27
Subject: Vacancies in Subordinate Judiciary
Ministry: LAW AND JUSTICE
Asked by: Shri E T Mohammed Basheer

## GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

## LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 5722 TO BE ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 27 TH  MARCH, 2026

## VACANCIES IN SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY

## 5722. SHRI E T MOHAMMED BASHEER:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

- (a)  whether  the  Government  has  formulated  a  time-bound  plan,  in  coordination  with  State Governments and High Courts, to fill the large number of vacancies in the subordinate judiciary which handles more than 85 per cent of the total judicial workload, if so, the details thereof;
- (b) the current status and roadmap for building consensus on the establishment of the All India Judicial Service (AIJS) to standardize recruitment and strengthen justice delivery across the country;
- (c) whether the Government is taking any legislative or executive steps to ensure the statutory independence, functional autonomy, and financial stability of various quasi-judicial tribunals in line with the Supreme Court's rulings; and
- (d) if so, the measures being taken to ensure transparent appointments and long-term tenure provisions for tribunal members to restore public confidence in specialized dispute resolution mechanisms?

## ANSWER

## MINISTER OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE) OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE; AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS

## (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL)

(a): Filling up of vacant positions of the judicial officers in District and Subordinate courts is the  responsibility  of  the  High  Courts  and  State  Governments  concerned.  As  per  the Constitutional framework, in exercise of powers conferred under the proviso to Article 309 read  with  Articles  233  and  234  of  the  Constitution,  the  respective  State  Government,  in consultation with the High Court, frames the rules and regulations regarding the appointment and recruitment of Judicial Officers.  The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order passed in January 2007 in the Malik Mazhar Sultan case, has inter-alia stipulated certain timelines, which are to be followed by the States and the respective High Courts for recruitment of judges in District and Subordinate Courts.

(b): Article  312  of  the  Constitution  provides  for  the  establishment  of  an  All  India  Judicial Service  (AIJS),  excluding  posts  below  the  rank  of  District  Judge.  The  proposal  has  been examined at  various  stages  and  has  been  recommended  by  the  First  National  Judicial  Pay Commission (Justice Shetty Commission) as well as by the Law Commission of India in its 14th (1958), 77th (1978) and 116th (1986) Reports. A comprehensive proposal approved by the Committee of Secretaries in November 2012 was considered in the Conference of Chief

Ministers and Chief Justices in April 2013, where it was decided that further deliberations were required and views of State Governments and High Courts were sought. However, divergent opinions emerged among stakeholders on the constitution of the AIJS.

The matter was further deliberated in conferences and meetings held in April 2015, wherein it was resolved to leave it to the respective High Courts to evolve appropriate mechanisms within the existing system to fill vacancies of District Judges expeditiously. The proposal was again discussed in a high-level meeting in January 2017 and examined by Parliamentary Committees, including the Parliamentary Consultative Committee (2017) and the Parliamentary Committee on the Welfare of SCs/STs (2021). Although it was proposed to place the matter before the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices in April 2022, the same could not be taken  up.  In  view  of  the  continuing  divergence  of  opinion  among  key  stakeholders,  no consensus has yet been reached on the establishment of the All India Judicial Service.

(c) & (d): The Government has undertaken various legislative and administrative measures from time to time to ensure the statutory independence, functional autonomy, and financial stability  of  various  quasi-judicial  tribunals.  The  process  of  rationalization  and  merger  of tribunals was carried out through the Finance Act, 2017 as part of the first phase of tribunal reforms. Thereafter, further reforms in this regard have been taken forward by the Department of Revenue. Subsequently, the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 was enacted, inter alia, to abolish certain  appellate  bodies  and  to  provide  for  uniform  terms  and  conditions  of  service  for Chairpersons and Members of various tribunals. Appointments to tribunals are made through a transparent process involving Search-cum-Selection Committees. Further, thirteen tribunals have been discontinued pursuant to the provisions of the Finance Act, 2017 and the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in its judgment dated 19.11.2025 in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India, has examined certain provisions relating to tenure, eligibility conditions and appointment process, and reiterated the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers.

The  Government  continues  to  take  necessary  Legislative  and  administrative  measures,  in consultation  with  stakeholders  and  in  compliance  with  judicial  directions,  to  ensure  the independence, functional autonomy and effective functioning of tribunals.

****