A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court clarified that the revised eligibility criteria for direct recruitment to the post of District Judge from the Bar — earlier reformulated by the Court, including the minimum years of practice requirement — will apply only prospectively. Candidates already in the recruitment pipeline under the older rules will not be disqualified; States and High Courts must complete pending selection processes under the rules that existed when those processes began.
District Judge appointments fall under Article 233 (Governor acting with the High Court), with Article 236 defining "district judge" and Article 235 vesting control over subordinate courts in the High Court. Since Supreme Court interpretations bind all courts under Article 141, the Bench used the judicially evolved tool of prospective overruling to avoid unsettling bona fide reliance, also invoking equality concerns under Articles 14 and 16 to prevent arbitrary treatment of similarly placed candidates.
Key takeaway: judicial rule-changes on eligibility ordinarily operate prospectively, protecting candidates who relied on existing rules; remember Articles 233, 234, 235, 236, 141, 14 and 16 in this context, and the concept of prospective overruling as a service-law safeguard.