Executive Summary:
This document addresses social diversity within the Indian Judiciary in response to questions raised in Lok Sabha. It provides data on the social background of judges appointed to High Courts since 2018 and outlines the government's stance on reservation in judicial appointments, referencing relevant articles of the Constitution of India. The document emphasizes the government's commitment to enhancing social diversity in the judiciary.
Key Points / Main Content:
Constitutional Basis and Data Availability:
* Appointments to the Supreme Court and High Courts are governed by Articles 124, 217, and 224 of the Constitution, which do not provide for reservation based on caste or class.
* Category-wise data on the representation of castes or classes among judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts is not centrally maintained.
Data on Appointments Since 2018:
* Since 2018, recommendees for High Court Judge posts are required to provide details on their social background.
* From 2018 to July 28, 2025, 753 judges were appointed, including 24 from the SC category, 17 from the ST category, 93 from the OBC category, and 42 from minority communities.
* 117 women were appointed as Judges in various High Courts during the same period.
Appointment Process and Government's Role:
* The Chief Justice of India initiates proposals for Supreme Court Judge appointments, while the Chief Justices of the High Courts initiate proposals for High Court Judge appointments, as per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP).
* The government is committed to enhancing social diversity in the judiciary and requests High Court Chief Justices to consider suitable candidates from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities, and Women.
* Only individuals recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium are appointed as Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
High Court Staff Appointments:
* High Court staff appointments are made according to rules established by the High Courts, as per Article 229(2) of the Constitution.
Impact Analysis:
Chief Justices of High Courts:
Impact: Expected to give due consideration to candidates from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities and Women when proposing candidates for judicial appointments, to enhance social diversity.
Action Required: Consider suitable candidates from underrepresented social groups when initiating proposals for judicial appointments.
Supreme Court Collegium:
Impact: The Supreme Court Collegium retains the power to recommend individuals for appointment as Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
Action Required: Continue to make recommendations.
Government:
Impact: Remains committed to enhancing social diversity in the judiciary but is limited by the constitutional framework and the appointment process.
Action Required: Continue requesting the Chief Justices of High Courts to consider suitable candidates from underrepresented social groups.
Key Entities Referenced
Supreme Court: The highest judicial body in India, responsible for interpreting the Constitution and adjudicating disputes. Referred to in the context of appointments of judges and recent decisions.
High Courts: The principal civil courts of original jurisdiction in each state and union territory of India. Mentioned with respect to appointment of judges and social diversity.
Chief Justice of India: The head of the Indian judiciary and the Supreme Court. Responsible for initiating proposals for appointment of judges in the Supreme Court.
Scheduled Castes: A group of historically disadvantaged communities in India, recognized by the Constitution and entitled to certain protections and reservations. Mentioned in the context of social diversity in judiciary.
Scheduled Tribes: A group of indigenous communities in India, recognized by the Constitution and entitled to certain protections and reservations. Mentioned in the context of social diversity in judiciary.
Other Backward Classes: A group of socially and educationally disadvantaged communities in India, entitled to certain reservations. Mentioned in the context of social diversity in judiciary.
Constitution of India: The supreme law of India, which establishes the framework for the government and protects fundamental rights. Articles 124, 217, 224 and 229(2) are specifically referenced in the context of judicial appointments and high court rules.
Memorandum of Procedure: Document outlining the procedure for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. Referred to as MoP.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
LOK SABHA
STARRED QUESTION NO. 197
ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 01ST AUGUST, 2025
Social diversity in Judiciary
*197. SHRI SACHITHANANTHAM R:
Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:
(a) the present position regarding social diversity in Judiciary in the
background of recent SC decision to implement reservation in the
staff appointments;
(b) whether the Government has taken up the issue of Reservation in the
appointments of Judges in SC and HCs in light of the remark by
Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, if so, the action taken in this regard
and if not, the reasons therefor; and
(c) whether the appointment of 78% of judges to HCs since 2018 from
Upper castes warrant an urgent need to overhaul the system of
judicial appointments for SC and HCs, if so, the reaction of the
Government in this regard?
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) to (c): A statement is laid on the Table of the House.
[1]STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (c) IN
RESPECT OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 197 FOR
REPLY ON 01st AUGUST, 2025 REGARDING ‘SOCIAL DIVERSITY
IN JUDICIARY’
(a) to (c): 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 regarding 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.
[2]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”.
***
[3]