"50 years after Independence, the Judiciary continues to be largely a preserve of the high castes, or of the dominant castes at the State level, despite the guidelines issued by the Central Governinent in favour of SC, ST and minorities. The major causes of this near monopoly are educational backwardness of the out-groups and the nepotism, conscious and unconscious, practised by the in- groups. To maintain the credibility of the Judiciary in a period of transition, it must command the confidence of all sections of the people, of all castes and communities. It is already being whispered that many judicial decisions with a bearing on social engineering are not 'colour blind' as they ought to be. Social bias and prejudice have a way of seeping through sub-terranean channels into the judicial chambers. The judges are human beings after all and, except in rare cases, share the social ethos.
Time has come to assert that comparative merit cannct be determined on the basis of opinion, even of a collegium, and, therefore, the principle of merit cannot be invoked to block the path to Social Justice and that universal: empowerment in a multi-segmented society implies the equitable representation of all segments and sections in all institutions of the State, in the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary and must be accepted at least as the long-term ideal.
Therefore, the Nation must consciously and continuously move towards the ideal. The first step should be the institution of reservation for the SC, the ST, the OBC's and the Minorities in the State Judicial Services and in the, much heralded and long-delayed, Indian Judicial Service when it is constituted. In the meantime, sincere effort should be made by the Chief Justices of all High Courts to identify and recommend promising talent among the under-represented segments. Indeed the opening of the doors will itself spur the youth from these groups into legal education and profession and acquiring competitive levels of excellence.
The Supreme Court should make the process of selection and recommendation transparent and reveal the level of representation of various social groups in the Bench, from year-to-year, in order to sustain faith and hope in the deprived groups.
The Nation should indeed be grateful to the President for placing on record the fact of under-representation of the weaker sections in the Judiciary. Notwithstanding the avoidable controversy, his sage counsel is bound to accelerate the democratisation of the judicial system though merit-based selection over the entire social spectrum.
