20. PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
20.1 The adequate promotional opportunity is one of the significant factors in service jurisprudence. Every officer looks forward to reasonable career progression not only because of higher salary but also with the object of occupying higher position of power and responsibility. It is undeniable that stagnation for long period would demoralise the officers. It is, therefore, necessary to evolve a proper promotion policy.
20.2 Keeping in view these factors, the Commission sought the views and comments on the following Questions :
Q.No.44. How many promotions a Judicial officer in your State at the lowest cadre normally gets during his tenure of service and at what intervals? Work out the realities with concrete examples.
Q.No.44.1. Does he invariably reach the highest cadre in the Judicial Service before retirement? If not, at what level does he stagnate and let the Commission have your suggestions to avoid stagnation?
Q.No.44.2. Should promotion be based on selection by merit alone or seniority-cum-merit? Please give reasons for preferring one or the other.
20.3 The replies received from the Respondents are presented below :
Almost all the High Courts have stated that a Judicial Officer recruited at the lowest level [i.e. Civil Judge (Junior Division)], generally gets promotion upto the post of Addl. District Judge / District Judge. Certain stray incidents of some Judicial Officers recruited as Civil Judges (Junior Division) retiring as Civil Judge (Senior Division) have also been reported. On careful scrutiny, it is found that such Officers have entered Judicial Service at an advanced age and could not complete even 25 years of service, before they could get promotion to the cadre of Addl. District Judge / District Judges. It is also noticed that in some cases, Civil Judges (Junior Division) not only reached the cadre of District Judges, but also marched to the High Court.
20.4 Some of the High Courts have reported that normally the first promotion from the cadre of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) to Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) takes place within 6-9 years and second promotion after an interval of another 6-9 years. The High Courts of Kerala, Allahabad and Calcutta have stated that the interval between one promotion and another is about a decade. However, Sikkim stands as an exception. It is a small State with less number of Judicial Officers and having a population of around 5 lakhs with no scope for adequate promotional opportunity.
20.5 To prevent stagnation, various views have been expressed. Many of the High Courts / Service Associations and State Governments have suggested the following remedies :
i) Introduction of time bound pay scales or career advancement scheme.
ii) Provide a running pay scale.
iii) Stop direct recruitment from the Bar to the cadre of District Judges.
iv) Reduce at least the percentage of direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judges and make it uniform in all States / UTs.
v) All ex-cadre posts having judicial functions must be brought within the umbrella of judicial service with provision for deputation.
vi) Create selection grade and super-time scale in the District Judges cadre.
20.6 On the question as to whether promotion has to be on the basis of seniority-cum-merit or promotion by selection, the following suggestions have been received:
The High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Kerala and Orissa have suggested that all promotions shall be made on the ground of ability and merit so as to keep all the Officers on their toes all the time and compel them to improve and give their best. However, they have added that seniority will have to be considered where merit and ability are equal.
The High Courts of Bihar, Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab & Haryana, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal have favoured the principle of seniority-cum-merit for promotion. According to them, though promotion by merit is good in principle, it is more often based on subjective satisfaction and it is difficult to objectively consider the standard of meritorious performance.
Most of the Service Associations and State Governments have, however, favoured the principle of ‘Seniority-cum-Merit’ for promotion.
20.7 Taking all these factors into consideration, we have :
i) Rationalised the cadre structure and accordingly rationalised the pay structure also. Evolved a Master Pay Scale and carved out the required number of pay scales which have been elongated to prevent stagnation.
ii) Recommended Assured Career Progression Scheme for the cadres of Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Civil Judge (Senior Division) by providing two financial upgradations, within the stipulated time-frame.
iii) Recommended Selection Grade and Super-Time Pay Scales for District Judges, consistent with the functional needs and requirements.
iv) Recommended that the cadre of Civil Judges (Senior Division) should be purely a promotional cadre and no direct recruitment should be made to this cadre.
v) Recommended suitable amendment to Article 233 (2) of the Constitution to provide an opportunity for in-service Judges to compete for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judges.
vi) Recommended that ‘not exceeding 25% of the posts in the cadre of District Judges should be reserved for direct recruitment’. This much of percentage for direct recruitment is considered necessary to promote efficiency, while at the same time, not impairing the interests of the promotees.
vii) Recommended an innovative concept of certain weightage for fixing the inter-se-seniority of the promotees and direct recruits in the cadre of District Judges to minimise if not to remove the constant irritation and imbalance between the promotees and direct recruits.
viii) Suggested that the promotional posts should be filled up at the earliest without being linked to the direct recruits.
* * * * *