IMPORTANT POINT
High Court was wrong in arriving at the finding that constitution of Two Judge Committee by Acting CJ of the High Court to consider the merit of the Judicial Officers of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service relating to appointment to selection scale was illegal.
.

Headnote:Rules of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, 1952 Rules 15, 21(2), 29 and 35-Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1969-Consideration of individual merit of the Judicial Officers of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service (RHJS) relating to appointment to selection scale-Acting CJ of High Court appointed two Judges to consider-They recommended those officers to be fit whose 5 ACR s out of 7 were outstanding very good or good-Full Court of 20 Judges participated) approved it-Respondents, names deferred as their ACR s not recorded for one reason or other-They filed writ petitions-DB directed consideration of their names holding that Acting CJ could not constitute two Judges committee and Full Court of all the Judges of High Court should have been consulted-Appeal to Supreme Court-Whether High Court was right? (No)-Appeals allowed -Case law discussed.
       Held : The High Court, in our opinion, therefore, clearly erred in arriving at the aforementioned finding that the constitution of the committee was illegal. (Para 23)
       It is also incorrect to contend that all the Judges of the High Court are required to be consulted at a time. (Para 25)
       Held further : We may notice that even in the Full Court meeting held on 26th November, 1966 all the Hon ble Judges of the High Court were not present. (Para 30)
       Held thereafter : It is, therefore, axiomatic that not only the Chief Justice of High Court was free to initiate any proceedings and obtain the opinion of a Committee of Judges on such matters and the only legal requirement therefor is to place such proposals together with the opinion of the Committee before the Judges of the High Court so that the matter can be fully thrashed out. Once the Full Court approves the recommendations made by the Committee of Judges, it becomes decision of the Court which could be sent to the Governor for acting thereupon. (Para 34)
       Held in addition : There is another aspect of the matter which may require consideration. For all intent and purport the report of the two Judges Committee has been approved by the Full Court. Once approved, it terminated into a decision of the Full Court itself. In the instant case even the Governor has acted upon the recommendations of the High Court. The writ petitioners-first respondents herein did not question the appointments of the appointees not the High Court. Thus, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that for all intent and purport the opinion of the two Judges Committee received approval at the hands of the Full Court. The High Court, in our opinion, further committed a manifest error in arriving at its conclusion in so far as it failed to take into consideration that Rule 15 does not postulate the prior approval of the Full Court in relation to any action which may be initiated by the Chief Justice. (Paras 38 and 39)
       Held consequently : In any view of the matter, even in a case where the initial action is illegal, the same can be ratified by a body competent therefor. This aspect of the matter has not been considered by the High Court at all. (Para 42)
       Held also : Furthermore, the first respondent herein in these cases Shri P.P. Singh, Shri G.P. Pandey has been granted selection scale in RHJS with effect from 1.8.2000 and Shri P.K. Bhatia has been given with effect from 29.3.2000. Shri P.P. Singh has also retired from service on superannuation. (Para 46)
       Held finally : We are of the opinion that impugned judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. The appeals are allowed but in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. (Para 47)

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.-The effect of the recommendations of a Committee of two Judges as regards criteria for grant of selection scale appointed by an Acting Chief Justice which have subsequently been approved by a Full Court of the High Court is in question in these appeals which arise out of a judgment and order passed by a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court dated 23rd November, 2000 in D.B. Civil Writ Petitions No. 671 of 2000, 987 of 2000 and 1263 of 2000.

2. The High Court of Rajasthan in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 46 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949 read with Article 225 of the Constitution of India and all other powers enabling it in that behalf made Rules known as Rules of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, 1952 (hereinafter called and referred to as "the Rules").

3. The Rules came into force on or about 1st October, 1952. Chapter 3 of the said Rules refers to Administrative Business of the High Court.

4. The Rules of the High Court were amended by a Resolution of the Full Court of the High Court on 26.11.1966; and the relevant portion of the Minutes thereof are as under :-

"Minutes of the proceedings of the Full Court Meeting held on Saturday, the 26th November, 1966, at 11 A.M. in the Chamber of the Hon ble the Chief Justice.

****

AGENDA :

I. Amendment in the High Court Rules relating to the Administrative Business of the Court.

II. Any other matter which Hon ble the Chief Justice may like to be discussed.

DECISIONS:

ITEM No. II:-

The amendments proposed by the Hon ble Administrative Judge in Chapter III of the High Court Rules relating to the administrative and executive business of the Court were considered.

Resolved that in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 46 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, and Articles 225, 227, 233, 234 and 235 of the Constitution of India and all other powers enabling the Court in that behalf, the following changes and amendments in Chapter III of the High Court Rules relating to the administrative and executive business of the Court be effected:-

1. The words "Executive and" occurring in the heading of Chapter III shall be omitted;

2. For rules 14 to 22 the following rules shall be substituted :-

"14. Administrative business relating to control over subordinate courts and to superintendence over courts and tribunals.-All administrative business of the Court relating to the control over subordinate courts vested in the Court under Article 235 of the Constitution or otherwise and to the superintendence over the courts and tribunals vested in the Court under Article 227 of the Constitution or otherwise shall be disposed of as provided hereinafter.

15. Matters on which all Judges shall be consulted.-On the following matters all the Judges of the Court shall be consulted, namely :-

(d) appointment, promotion and seniority of Judicial offices;

(e) withholding of promotion, supersession or reduction of Judicial Officers;

(f) removal or dismissal of any Judicial Officer;

(g) compulsory retirement of Judicial Officers otherwise than by way of punishment;

(h) important questions of policy or those affecting the powers and status of the Court laid before the Court by the Chief Justice or any other Judge;

(i) any matters which the Chief Justice or the Administrative Committee, as constituted under Rule 16, may consider fit to be laid before them for consideration.

16. Administrative Committee.-(1) A Committee of Judges shall be formed composed of the Chief Justice, the Administrative Judge and such other Judge or Judges as the Chief Justice may, from time to time, appoint. This Committee shall be called the Administrative Committee.

(2) Subject to these Ru

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2003 Supreme(SC) 97

IMPORTANT POINTHigh Court was wrong in arriving at the finding that constitution of Two Judge Committee by Acting CJ of the High Court to consider the merit of the Judicial Officers of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service relating to appointment to selection scale was illegal..

Cases Referred (15)

IMPORTANT POINT
High Court was wrong in arriving at the finding that constitution of Two Judge Committee by Acting CJ of the High Court to consider the merit of the Judicial Officers of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service relating to appointment to selection scale was illegal.
.