New Delhi, Aug. 22 -- The Supreme Court on Friday revised its eligibility criteria for selection of judicial officers at the lowest rung by reducing the three-year mandatory legal practice rule to just one and upon selection, requiring the trainee judge to undergo institutional training for a further period of two years. At the end of the two year training-the first year at the judicial academy; six months with a district judge; and the last six months with a high court judge-the court required a report to be submitted by the concerned high court judge. The judicial officer will be regularised after the report is found satisfactory. During the period of training at the state judicial academy, the court held the trainee judge to be entitled to a fixed emolument equivalent to one-half of the remuneration payable to a Judicial Magistrate First Class in the concerned state. He would then serve as a clerk of either the Principal District Judge or District Judge or any senior judicial officer for six months providing a first-hand experience of conducting courts. The final six months phase will be under a high court judge who will prepare a report at the end of the training. The bench said, "The assessment must include the candidate's conduct, diligence, analytical ability, understanding of procedure, capacity to deal with cases, quality of legal reasoning and suitability for judicial office." The evaluation shall remain objective and reasoned and should not become an additional or undefined barrier to appointment, the bench said, adding further, "Subject to satisfactory evaluation, the trainee should thereafter enter regular judicial service with the status and remuneration attached to the post." The decision by the court came in a batch of review petitions and writ petitions challenging a May 20, 2025, decision of the top court which re-introduced the three year legal practice norm. By a majority verdict of 2:1, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant observed, "The purpose of an eligibility rule is to secure suitable candidates for judicial office. It should not, by the manner of its implementation, exclude candidates whom the judicial system would otherwise benefit from attracting." While the court made it clear that the changed criteria will apply to all recruitments to be made henceforth, the court noted that law graduates who were eligible from the date of judgment (May 20, 2025) till March 31, 2027 will be deemed to have undergone the one-year law practice. They were allowed to apply for selection as Civil Judge (Junior Division) without furnishing a certificate of practice. For all future selections after April 1, 2027, the decision of one-year prior practice followed by judicial training and clerkship will be applicable. The dissenting opinion was given by justice K Vinod Chandran, who upheld the three-year practice rule and dismissed the review petitions....