Relevance (UPSC): GS-II Polity & Governance (Judiciary, Inclusion)

A judge is not only a decider of law but also a public face of justice. When half the country rarely sees itself on the bench, trust thins. India’s higher judiciary still has very few women: about 14% in High Courts and one woman among 34 judges in the Supreme Court today. Only one of 25 High Courts is led by a woman Chief Justice. The pipeline below is healthier—women are roughly one-third of the lower judiciary—but the tap narrows as rank rises. How do we fix this?

Where we are

Why representation in higher courts matters

• Legitimacy: Diverse benches improve citizen trust and reduce perceived distance from the law.
• Quality of adjudication: Different life experiences sharpen questions on violence, labour, custody, disability and discrimination.
• Mentorship loop: Visible role models retain talented women at the bar and in the district courts.
• Constitutional promise: Equality (Articles 14–15) and dignity are not only for litigants; they should shape institutions too.

The bottlenecks

• Opaque selections under the collegium (a judge-led appointment system evolved through the Second Judges Case, 1993 and the 1998 advisory opinion).
• Leaky pipeline at the bar: long hours, unequal briefs, safety concerns, and limited senior-designation opportunities.
• Infrastructure & care gaps: toilets, child-care, secure transit; transfers that ignore caregiving realities.
• Data darkness: no public annual targets or reporting on gender in nominations, elevations or resignations.

Two Roads to a Representative Bench

Road 1: Collegium-plus Reform (keep the system, make it fair and transparent)

• Published criteria and long-lists: announce vacancies, publish diversity-aware criteria (merit, integrity, domain expertise, judgments/briefs), and issue long-lists before final picks.
• Independent secretariat: a small, professional unit to verify records, track diversity metrics, and handle conflicts of interest.
• Wider talent pool: consider district judges, service judges, academics, tribunals, and public defenders—not only senior counsel from metros.
• Structured interviews & reasons: record structured evaluations and give written reasons for selections and non-selections (with necessary redactions).
• Annual diversity report: court-wise data on applications, short-lists and appointments by gender, region, caste, disability and first-generation status.
• Workplace fixes: dedicated chambers, creches, secure transit, predictable rosters, and anti-harassment redressal with external members.
• Mentoring and training: national programmes pairing senior judges with promising women at the bar and in the district courts.

Why this road is feasible: It preserves judicial independence while addressing opacity—the core criticism—through procedure, data and facilities.

Road 2: A Merit-based National Judicial Service Pipeline (build a broader, uniform entry)

Article 312 allows Parliament to create All India Services. A carefully designed All India Judicial Service could:

• recruit talented graduates from all regions through a national, open competition conducted by the Union Public Service Commission;
• offer uniform training, transparent promotions, and mobility across states;
• steadily raise diversity in the feeder cadres that supply High Court judges.

Design safeguards to protect independence

• Eligibility, syllabi and evaluation rules to be drafted by the Supreme Court in consultation with High Courts, then notified by Parliament.
• Service control (post-recruitment training, appraisals, vigilance) under judicial boards, not executive departments.
• A balanced promotion quota for experienced state judicial officers plus lateral entry from the bar to keep the bench mixed.
• Mandatory gender-sensitive facilities and postings that consider caregiving.

Why this road helps: Evidence from competitive services shows broader social and economic diversity when entry is national, transparent and exam-based.

Related legal and policy framework

• Articles 124 & 217: appointments to the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• Articles 14–15: equality and non-discrimination.
• Article 312: creation of new All India Services (basis for a judicial service).
• Vishaka line of cases: workplace safety and anti-harassment principles.
• National Disaster Management Authority–style institutional secretariats as models for small, expert bodies inside the judiciary.

Key terms

Collegium: a judge-led group that recommends appointments and transfers to higher courts.

All India Judicial Service: a proposed national cadre for recruiting and training judges through a central examination.

Pipeline diversity: ensuring a wide, inclusive feeder pool (bar, district benches, academia).

Glass ceiling: invisible barriers that block promotion despite competence.

Reasoned transparency: disclosure of criteria and reasons without harming privacy or security.

Institutional independence: freedom from undue executive or private influence through rules, tenure and control of service matters.

Exam hook

Use this topic to connect women’s empowerment (GS-I) with judicial reforms (GS-II) and institutional design. Structure answers as Problem → Evidence → Two Roads → Safeguards → Timeline.

Key takeaways

• India’s higher judiciary has very low female representation despite a healthier base in the lower courts.
• Two complementary roads exist: reform the collegium to be open and data-driven, and build a national judicial service pipeline that expands and diversifies entry.
• Facilities, safety and mentoring are not add-ons; they are enablers of merit.

Using in the Mains Exam

Open with a short data point on women judges, explain the constitutional articles and the collegium’s evolution, then present Road 1 and Road 2 with safeguards. End with a time-bound plan and the line: “Representation strengthens independence by widening trust.”

UPSC Mains question

“Low female representation in India’s higher judiciary is a failure of process, pipeline and workplace design.” Critically examine. Propose a two-track reform—Collegium-plus and All India Judicial Service—with safeguards for independence, transparency and diversity.

UPSC Prelims question

Consider the following statements:

1. The collegium system flows from Supreme Court judgments and is not expressly written in the Constitution.
2. Parliament can create an All India Judicial Service under Article 312.
3. The Constitution mandates a fixed minimum quota for women judges in High Courts.

Answer: 1 and 2 only.

One-line wrap: Build trust by widening the bench—open the process, fix the workplace, and grow a national pipeline so justice wears a face India recognises.