Important for GS Prelims- Indian Polity & Governance
About AIJA –
- AIJA is a national organization of subordinate judiciary members registered in 1985 (Reg. No: S/15810 of 1985).
- Formed to secure uniform service conditions, pay, and independence for trial judges from executive control.
- Runs a continuing mandamus before the Supreme Court under Article 32, driving successive judicial service reforms since 1989.
Key Facts
| Particular | Details |
| Established | 1985 |
| Registration No. | S/15810 of 1985 |
| Founding Litigation | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1022 of 1989 (Article 32) |
| Nature | Continuing mandamus before the Supreme Court of India |
| Key Outcome Body | Shetty Commission (First National Judicial Pay Commission), 1996 |
| Successor Pay Body | Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC), 2017–2020 |
Key Responsibilities/Functions
- Advocates uniform judicial cadres, pay scales, and retirement age across States.
- Represents trial judiciary interests before national Pay Commissions.
- Litigated for residential accommodation, transport, and in-service training for judicial officers.
- Enforces ethical standards of honesty and decorum among member judges.
Related Bodies/Standards/Instruments
- First AIJA Case (1991) – directed steps toward an All-India Judicial Service (AIJS); raised retirement age to 60.
- Second AIJA Case (1993) – established judges’ sovereign status distinct from civil service; led to the Shetty Commission.
- Third AIJA Case (2002) – fixed District Judge recruitment quotas: 50% promotion, 25% LDCE, 25% direct recruitment.
- SNJPC (2017–2020) – introduced the J-1 to J-7 Pay Matrix, effective January 1, 2016.
- AIJA Judgment (May 20, 2025) – Bench led by CJI B.R. Gavai; restored 3-year Bar practice requirement for entry-level exams; based LDCE quota on total cadre strength; mandated suitability tests for promotions.
Conclusion
The All India Judges Association remains the principal institutional voice safeguarding the service conditions and independence of India’s trial judiciary. Its continuing mandamus has driven pay parity, structured promotion quotas, and pension reforms over three decades. The 2025 judgment further recalibrated recruitment and promotion norms to address long-standing cadre bottlenecks.
| This concept has been elaborately discussed in the following article: Supreme Court Suggests Raising Retirement Age of Judicial Officers to 61 |