The Supreme Court of India, while delivering an important judgment on Wednesday, said that members of subordinate judicial services will not be eligible for appointment as district judges through direct recruitment. The bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra while setting the order said that Article 233 (2) of the constitution requires seven years of continuous practice for eligibility and that only Bar candidates can avail the quota. On 16 January, a three-judge bench of Justices Arun Mishra, Justice Vineet Saran and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat reserved the order in the case.

BJP attacks Congress, says, "Did Digvijay Singh help 26/11 terrorists?"

While considering the sub-clause 2 of article 233 of the constitution, it said that this provision prohibits the appointment of candidates working in judicial service through direct recruitment as district judges. Subsection 2 of article 233 states that a person who is already in the service of the Center or the State shall not be eligible for appointment as a District Judge. The provision also states that a person eligible for the post of District Judge shall have Practicing experience as a lawyer should not be less than seven years and his name should be recommended by the High Court for an appointment. The members named Aypalika can be considered for the post of District Judge through promotion.

Hooda targets Abhay Singh, says- "Meeting without economic survey...."

The case of Dheeraj Mor vs. Delhi High Court was referred to the bench of this Supreme Court. There was a big question of law in relation to the interpretation of Article 233 of the Constitution, in this case, a reference was sent by the bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar on 23 January 2018. The bench said that a major issue for consideration is whether eligibility for appointment as District Judge is to be seen only at the time of appointment or at the time of application or both.

VIDEO: 'Jetman' blew up at height of 6000 feet, people remembers Marvel's Iron Man