Home India Ministry of Law and Justice Parliament Question: Inclusivity in the Higher Judiciary...
Date: 2025-08-01 Category: Not Applicable State: Union Government Country: India

Parliament Question: Inclusivity in the Higher Judiciary

Issued by Ministry of Law and Justice · Not Applicable

Research with AI Agent Chat with Document Generate Summary Translate Helpful Share Add to Project Create Task

Executive Summary & Key Takeaways

Executive Summary: This document is the Indian government's response to a parliamentary question regarding inclusivity in the higher judiciary. It details initiatives to promote diversity, provides data on appointments since 2019, and addresses the possibility of reservation for judicial staff. Data on judge appointments covers the period from 2018 to July 28, 2025. Key Points / Main Content: Diversity and Inclusivity Initiatives: * The Constitution does not provide for reservation based on caste or class in the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. * Category-wise data on the representation of castes or classes among judges is not centrally available. * Since 2018, recommendees for High Court Judge posts provide details on their social background. * The government is committed to enhancing social diversity in the judiciary. * High Court Chief Justices are requested to consider candidates from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities, and Women when proposing judge appointments. * Only candidates recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium are appointed as judges. Appointment Statistics (2018 - July 28, 2025): * Out of 753 judges appointed, 24 belong to the SC category, 17 to the ST category, 93 to the OBC category, and 42 to the minority category. * 117 women were appointed as Judges in various High Courts. Judicial Staff Reservation: * Appointment of High Court staff is governed by rules made by the High Courts, as per Article 229 of the Constitution. * Article 229 provides that service conditions of High Court staff are prescribed by rules made by the Chief Justice or an authorized judge/officer. Impact Analysis: Chief Justice of India: * Impact: Bears the responsibility for initiating proposals for the appointment of Judges in the Supreme Court. * Action Required: None. Chief Justices of High Courts: * Impact: Bears the responsibility for initiating proposals for the appointment of Judges in the High Courts. * Action Required: To give due consideration to candidates from diverse social backgrounds (SC, ST, OBC, Minorities, and Women) when sending proposals for judge appointments. Supreme Court Collegium: * Impact: Final decision-making power on judicial appointments. * Action Required: None. High Courts: * Impact: Responsible for setting rules for appointment and service conditions of their staff. * Action Required: None. Government: * Impact: Committed to enhancing social diversity in the judiciary. * Action Required: Continue requesting High Court Chief Justices to consider diverse candidates for judicial appointments. Judicial Candidates (SC, ST, OBC, Minorities, Women): * Impact: Increased consideration for judicial appointments. * Action Required: Provide accurate details about their social background in the prescribed format.

Key Entities Referenced

SHRI RAHUL GANDHI: Member of Parliament who raised the question in Lok Sabha regarding inclusivity in the Higher Judiciary. MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE: The government ministry responsible for matters related to law and justice. LOK SABHA: The lower house of the Parliament of India, where the question regarding inclusivity in the higher judiciary was raised. Supreme Court: The highest judicial body in India. High Courts: The principal civil courts of original jurisdiction in each state and union territory. Constitution of India: The supreme law of India, which includes Articles 124, 217, 224 and 229 regarding the appointment and service conditions of judges and staff. Scheduled Castes: One of the historically disadvantaged groups in India, for whom the government aims to improve representation in the judiciary. Other Backward Classes: A group of castes recognized as socially and educationally backward, for whom the government aims to improve representation in the judiciary.
Official Source Record View Original Source →
See Full Document Text
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 2175 TO BE ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 01ST AUGUST, 2025 Inclusivity in the Higher Judiciary 2175. SHRI RAHUL GANDHI: Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state: (a) the initiatives that are being taken to promote diversity and inclusivity in the Higher Judiciary; (b) the details of SC, ST, OBC, Minorities and Women Judges appointed in the High Courts since 2019; (c) whether any proposal to provide reservation in the appointment and promotion of judicial staff in the High Courts is being considered; and (d) if so, the details thereof? 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) & (b): Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts is made under Articles 124, 217 and 224 of the Constitution of India, which do not provide for reservation for any caste or class of persons. Therefore, category-wise data pertaining to representation of any caste or class of persons among the Judges of Supreme Court and the High Courts is not centrally available. Since 2018, the recommendees for the post of High Court Judges are required to provide details 1regarding their social background in the prescribed format (prepared in consultation with the Supreme Court). As per the information provided by the recommendees, out of 753 Judges appointed from 2018 till 28.07.2025, 24 belong to SC category, 17 belong to ST category, 93 belong to OBC category and 42 belong to the minority category. 117 women were appointed as Judges in various High Courts during the same period. As per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), the responsibility for initiation of proposals for appointment of Judges in the Supreme Court vests with the Chief Justice of India, while the responsibility for initiation of proposals for appointment of Judges in the High Courts vests with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court. However, the Government is committed to enhancing social diversity in judiciary and has 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 the appointment of Judges in High Courts. Only those persons who are recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium, are appointed as Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. (c) & (d): The staff of the High Courts are to be appointed as per Rules made by the High Courts in accordance with the powers conferred by Article 229(2) of the Constitution, which provides that “the conditions of service of officers and servants of a High Court shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made by the Chief Justice of the Court or by some other Judge or officer of the Court authorised by the Chief Justice to make rules for the purpose”. **** 2

Continue your research