The appointment of judges to High Courts are made under Article 217 of the Constitution and there is no quota fixed. (File)
Listen to this article
Last 5 years, 79% of new HC judges upper caste, SC and minority 2% each
x
00:00
1x1.5x1.8x
UNDERLINING THAT the onus of ensuring diversity on the bench is on the judiciary, the Union Law Ministry has told the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice that 79 per cent of all High Court judges appointed in the last five years were from the upper caste (general category).
The Ministry’s Department of Justice is learnt to have made a presentation in this regard before the panel headed by BJP MP Sushil Modi.
The data show that from 2018 to December 19, 2022, a total of 537 judges were appointed to various High Courts. Of them, 79 per cent were from the General Category, 11 per cent from Other Backward Classes and 2.6 per cent from the minority. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes accounted for 2.8 per cent and 1.3 per cent, respectively. The Ministry could not ascertain the social background of 20 judges.
Story continues below this ad
In 2018, the Ministry had asked those recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium to fill a form with details of their socio-economic background. In a reply to the Rajya Sabha in March 2022, Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju had said that “the Government remains committed to social diversity in the appointment of Judges in the Higher Judiciary”.
“We have been requesting the Chief Justices of High Courts that while sending proposals for appointment of Judges, due consideration be given to suitable candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities and Women to ensure social diversity in appointment of Judges in High Courts,” Rijiju had said.
The appointment of judges to High Courts are made under Article 217 of the Constitution and there is no quota fixed. However, the landmark 1993 case in the Supreme Court that established the Collegium system of appointing judges — popularly known as the Second Judges Case — emphasised representation as a factor in making recommendations for appointments.
“Our democratic polity is not only for any self perpetuating oligarchy but is for all people of our country. If the vulnerable section of the people are completely neglected, we cannot claim to have achieved real participatory democracy,” the court had said.
Story continues below this ad
the 1993 ruling, quoting from a Government reply to Parliament, the court had noted the “unpalatable… ground reality” of representation at that time.
“Though the strength of the Judges belonging to OBCs as shown in the statement (as on 1-1-93) may or may not reflect the correct position at the present moment, we can safely assume the percentage of such Judges to be not exceeding 10% of the total sanctioned strength. Likewise, the percentage of the Judges belonging to SCs and STs put together does not exceed 4% as per the latest statement dated 20.5.93. So far as women Judges are concerned, their strength as of 20.5.93 does not exceed 3%,” the court had stated.
Apurva Vishwanath is the National Legal Editor of The Indian Express in New Delhi. She graduated with a B.A., LL. B (Hons) from Dr Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. She joined the newspaper in 2019 and in her current role, oversees the newspapers coverage of legal issues. She also closely tracks judicial appointments. Prior to her role at the Indian Express, she has worked with ThePrint and Mint. ... Read More