The Supreme Court has declined to dismantle Telangana’s rule that only advocates with at least seven years of practice within the state’s courts can compete for District Judge appointments.
The rule, introduced in 2023 under the Telangana State Judicial Service Rules, replaced earlier provisions and firmly tied eligibility to practice experience in the state’s High Court or subordinate courts.
Petitioners from outside Telangana challenged the restriction, arguing it was unconstitutional. But a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George, while closing the case on September 26, let the rule stand. The judges made it clear that the larger constitutional questions remain undecided for future consideration.
As a temporary concession, the Court acknowledged that the petitioners had already been permitted to sit for the exams while the challenge was pending. On the Court’s suggestion, the Telangana High Court agreed to treat successful candidates from the 2023 and 2024 rounds as a one-time exception—allowing them to be appointed without setting a precedent.
The Supreme Court directed that those who cleared the exams and are found suitable be issued appointment letters within two months. However, the relief comes with conditions: appointees cannot claim arrears of salary and will be placed lower in seniority than judges already in service, their ranking determined strictly by the date of appointment.
By carving out this limited exception, the Court gave individual relief without diluting the state’s rule—leaving the broader constitutional debate about Article 233 and state restrictions on judicial recruitment open for another day.