[Delhi Judicial Service Examination 2022] Candidates who qualified in 2020 and 2021 under 32 years may apply: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed candidates who qualified for the Delhi Judicial Service Examinations that were to be held in 2020 and 2021, to appear for this year's edition of the exam, provided they have not crossed the maximum age limit of 32 years..A Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Hima Kohli and AS Bopanna also ordered that a similar benefit can be availed by candidates of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service exam. "We will allow candidates qualified in 2020 and 2021 when they did not cross the age of 32 to appear in exams this year. We will extend the same benefit for the ones who were not 45 years in 2020 and 2021 for the Delhi Higher Judicial Services exam this year. We are upholding the 35 years age (minimum age criteria for DHJS exam)," the Court ordered. .The Court also extended the last date of application for the Delhi Judicial Service (DJS) Exam and the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS) exams. The last date for applying for the DJS exam is now April 3 and the exam shall be held on April 17. For the DHJS exam, the last date of application is now March 26 and the exam will be held on April 3.Moreover, the Court held,"We will deal with issues pertaining to DJS and DHJS separately. The writ petitions before the Delhi High Court stand transferred to this Court.".The Bench was hearing a batch of petitions seeking, among other reliefs, relaxation of the age limit of 32 years for the Delhi Judicial Service Examination 2022 as well as the minimum age of 35 for the Delhi Higher Judicial Service exam. Senior Advocates Devadatt Kamat and ADN Rao told the Court that their clients had crossed the age cap in 2022, and did not have the opportunity to write the exam previously, as it was not held in 2020 and 2021.Rao told the Bench,"Please let these people appear in the exam who were eligible in 2021 and could not appear then due to non-holding of exams. We should without prejudice extend the dates of filing applications."He also suggested that the exam be postponed by two weeks so that similarly placed candidates could move court for relief..The Court then said,"The Constitution does not bar someone to become a judge at 33, 34. You are appointing a member in the higher judicial services; you require candidates with sufficient degree of maturity...Fixation of upper age limit of 32 or 45 is typically a subject matter of judgments of our court and we have upheld such cut off age limits."At this point, Kamat told the Court,"The Court has always considered that if due to administrative reasons, a person was denied opportunity, Court has in equity interfered and given the opportunity...I don't want postponement of exams, it can be on March 27."However, the Court observed,"We cannot only grant relief to you. We have to give similarly placed persons an equal bite of the cherry...Why should High Court postpone public exams? We have to stop this tendency of postponing exams.".Appearing for a candidate who had cleared the preliminary exam, but was eligible for the main exam this year, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra pointed out,"Today, the number of students appearing is also less. In 2020, it was 2,241 students. Now it is 1,200...the law now allows you to practice at the age of 22-23. My candidate is only 17 days short. By the interim order, who did not go to the High Court cannot do this.".Senior Advocates AS Chandhiok, Anita Shenoy and Dama Seshadri Naidu also made similar pleas on behalf of various petitioners..After hearing the lawyers, the Court noted in its order that since the exam was not conducted for two recruitment years, the High Court stated that as a one-time measure, it would allow candidates who qualified for the 2020 and 2021 exams to sit for this year's exam. It thus held,"Having regard to the fact that recruitment for DJS was last held in 2019 and 2 recruitment years have lapsed, we are of the view that the High Court's suggestion be accepted for this year."The Bench also made it clear that no impediment shall be caused in the conduct of the exams and no order of stay shall be ordered by any other court in variance of this order..The Delhi High Court had issued notifications for conduct of the DJS and DJHS exams on February 22. For the DJS exam, the last date for application was March 20 the and exam was scheduled for March 27. For DHJS, the last date for application was March 12 and the exam date was March 20.Rule 14(c) of the Delhi Judicial Service Rules, 1970 stipulated that a candidate shall be eligible to appear for the DJS exams if he is not more than 32 years old as on January 1 following the date of commencement of the exams. This Rule was amended in February 2022 to stipulate that a candidate shall be eligible to appear in the exam if he is not more than 32 years old on January 1 of the year in which applications for appointment are invited.Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, the exams could not be conducted in 2020 and 2021. The grievance of the petitioners was that they would not be eligible to write the 2022 exams by virtue of the age limits, despite not having the chance to do so in the last two years..Last week, the Delhi High Court had postponed the Delhi Judicial Service Exam for 2022 after a petition was filed by a practicing advocate challenging the age limit criteria to sit for the exam. Thus, the High Court on the administrative side approached the apex court in appeal against this order..As far as the DHJS is concerned, the Delhi High Court had in 2019 amended the Rules to specify that a candidate must have attained the age of 35 and ought not to have attained age of 45 for eligibility to sit for the exam.In a plea before the High Court against this amendment, it was contended that as per Article 233 of the Constitution, the only qualification to be a district judge is continuous practice for 7 years as a lawyer or pleader. In that matter, the High Court had extended the last date of application for the DJHS exam.Today, the apex court noted in its order that description of a rule providing for minimum and maximum age for service is a matter of policy. It referred to its judgment in Hirendra Kumar which had upheld the age criterion for the Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service exam.On the contention that the age limit was contrary to Article 233 of the Constitution, the Court held,"Constitution does not preclude the rule-making power of High Courts. Constitution being silent on prescription of minimum age, High Court in exercise of rule-making authority can prescribe such rules.Recruitment to higher judicial service is intended to be from members of the Bar who have sufficient experience; that is why Constitution stipulates 7 years practice as lawyer. High Courts will be well within their domain to ensure that a candidate with sufficient maturity enters the fold of the higher judiciary. Thus, 35 years age limit is intended to subserve this."It thus held that the challenge to the requirement of minimum age of 35 years for the DHJS was without merit..[Read a live account of the hearing here]