Selection on the post of District Judge (Entry Level) has to be made in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006.

Selection on the post of District Judge (Entry Level) has to be made in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006.

1. Excellent question that emanates for consideration is, where recommendations made by Justice Shetty Commission and statutory Recruitment Rules namely the Chhattisgarh Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, are at variance; which has to be followed in making selection and appointment for the post of District Judge (Entry Level).

2. Feeling aggrieved against his non-selection and appointment on the post of District Judge (Entry Level), the petitioner herein/non-appointee has preferred this writ petition stating inter alia that the prescription of 50% minimum marks in viva voce test is unsustainable and contrary to the rules.

3. Respondent No. 1 High Court of Chhattisgarh advertised the post of District Judge (Entry Level) by Direct Recruitment Examination 2012, on 14-9-2012 for 11 posts for which written examination was held on 9-12-2012 and in which the petitioner appeared as a candidate for the said post. Result of the said examination was declared on 9-5-2013 in which the petitioner was successful and also secured second position in the said examination, as he had secured 135 marks out of 200. The petitioner thereafter, also appeared in the viva voce examination but when the final result was declared on 24-6-2013, he remained unsuccessful, as according to him he did not get minimum bench mark of 10 in the viva voce examination and he was declared non selected. The petitioner firstly preferred W.P.(C)No. 47/2014 before the Supreme Court of India and ultimately, that petition has been withdrawn with liberty to file the same before this Court. The principal ground of challenge in the writ petition is that there is no statutory rules fixing 50% marks as minimum and qualifying marks in viva voce and such prescription of 50% marks in viva voce is contrary to the law declared and further that the Supreme Court has accepted the recommendations of Justice Shetty Commission Report in All India Judges’ Assn. v. Union of India holding that there should not be any requirement for securing minimum marks in viva voce which ought to have been given effect to in the present case. The petitioner being meritorious candidate having secured second position in the merit list has suffered injustice in the viva voce examination on account of prescription of 50% qualifying marks and therefore, a writ of mandamus be issued directing respondent No. 1 to consider his case for selection and appointment on the post of District Judge (Entry Level) along with other consequential service benefits.

4. Mr. K.A. Ansari, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, would vehemently submit that prescription of 50% minimum marks in the interview / viva voce contrary to the recommendations of Justice Shetty Commission which have been accepted by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Assn. case (supra) is contrary to law, as it has already been held accepting the recommendations that there should not be any requirement to secure minimum marks in interview which ought to have been given effect to by respondent No.1 High Court of Chhattisgarh in the subject recruitment and prescription of minimum qualifying marks to the extent of 50%, if any, by the Chhattisgarh Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006 will not prevail over the report of Justice Shetty Commission duly accepted in All India Judges’ Assn. case (supra). He placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hemani Malhotra v. High Court of Delhi and would further submit that non-selection of the petitioner on the basis that he could not secure 10 qualifying marks in the interview would run contrary to the recommendations of Justice Shetty Commission as accepted by the Supreme Court. He would also submit that the Rules of 2006 have to give way to the recommendations of Justice Shetty Commission duly accepted by the Supreme Court in All India Judges’ Assn. (supra). Therefore, a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding respondent No. 1 to consider and appoint the petitioner on the post of District Judge (Entry Level), as the post of District Judge (Entry Level) is lying vacant.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.