1973 Supreme(SC) 112
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.G. PALEKAR AND A. ALAGIRISWAMI, JJ.
The Registrar of High Court of Madhya Pradesh and another, Appellants
Versus
B. A. Nigam and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 624 of 1972, D/- 3-4-1973.
ANTHONEY G.MENESES, J.B.DADACHAN, M.N.Phadke, O.C.MATHUR, P.C.BHARTARI, Ravindra Narayan
Headnote:Constitution of India – Articles 16 (1) and 311–Decision as to seniority for promotion–Service as Civil Judge, Class I essential for promotion as Additional District Judge–Petitioner found unfit for promotion as Civil Judge, Class I, till November 1968–Claim for seniority for promotion as Additional District Judge is to be decided with reference to date of promotion as Civil Judge, Class I and not date of entry into service.
Though the service rules did not provide for classification of Civil Judges as Class I and Class II, the M.P. Civil Courts Acts did provide for such classification and the jurisdiction of Civil Judge Class II was upto Rs 5,000 while that of Class I was Rs. 10,000. Experience as Civil Judge Class I for period however small was considered as necessary qualification for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judge. The High Court by a resolution decided that selection of Class II Judge as Class I would be considered as promotion and only cases of Class I Judges shall be considered for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judge in order of seniority. On a number of occasions from May 1966 the petitioner was found unfit for promotion as Civil Judge Class I while his juniors were so promoted but ultimately on 31st November 1968 he was so promoted and he filed a petition in the High Court for being considered for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judge in preference to all his juniors previously promoted as Class I, on the ground that his seniority should be counted from the date of his entry in service as Civil Judge. The High Court allowed the petition.
Held: Though it was not impossible it was improbable that if petitioner's case had been compared with others before May 1966, he might have been found fit for being posted as Civil Judge, Class I that the High Court was not by its resolution creating a new class as Civil Judges, Class I and that once it was found that experience as Civil Judge Class I at least for a short period was necessary for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judge and such requirement had a rational relation to the suitability of Civil Judges for such promotion it could not be held that the claim of the petitioner who again and again had been found unfit to be posted as Civil Judge, Class I in comparison with his juniors in service should be decided not on the basis of the date of his promotion as Civil Judge Class I, but on the basis of his entry in service.
Judgment
ALAGIRISWAMI, J. :- In the Judicial Service of Madhya Pradesh there are three classes of officers, Civil Judges, Additional District & Sessions Judges and District Judges but under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1958 there are four classes of Civil Courts, the Court of the District Judge, the Court of the Addl. District Judge, the Court of the Civil Judge (Class I) and the Court of the Civil Judge (Class II). The respondent No. I, Shri B. A. Nigam, entered service as a Civil Judge on 20-10-1956 in Madhya Bharat. After Madhya Bharat became part of Madhya Pradesh he was absorbed as a Civil Judge and placed for purposes of seniority at No. 189. From the time when the Madhya Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1958 came into force some period of service of a Civil Judge during which he exercised powers of Civil Judge, Class I, however small, was considered a necessary qualification for promotion to the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge. On or about May 3, 1968, by a resolution of the High Court it was laid down that selection of a Civil Judge, Class II, as a Civil Judge, Class I, shall be deemed as promotion and that being so, only the cases of Civil Judges, Class I, shall be considered for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judges in order of their seniority. It must be made clear at the outset that according to the Service Rules there is only one class of Civil Judges and not two classes of Civil Judges (Class I) and Civil Judges (Class II). The fitness of the respondent (1) for promotions as Civil Judge, Class I, seems to have been considered on a number of occasions i.e. on May 3, 1966, August 12, 1966, April 17, 1967, November 6, 1967 and April 18, 1968 and on each of these occasions he was not found fit to exercise powers of a Civil Judge, Class I. Mr. I. N. Shroff appearing for the appellants has also shown us the file containing the proceedings of the Judges meetings of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh on the various dates above referred to in which the names of various officers for being posted as Class I Civil Judges have been considered. We have scrutinised them carefully and can see no reason to doubt the bona fide nature of the decisions therein made. The High Court has also taken the view that though the junior members in the cadre of Civil Judges had often been allowed to exercise the powers of Civil Judge, Class I, without considering at that time the respondent s claim and then those junior members had been preferred for promotion on the ground that they had exercised such powers, and such preference was open to attack as being violative of the fundamental rights of the respondent, they could not assist him on that ground because even if his claims for exercising the powers of Civil Judge. Class I had been considered at the appropriate time, he would not have been found fit for the purpose for the reason earlier mentioned. While it is not impossible that if the respondent s case had been compared with that of others before the 3rd May, 1966, he might have been found fit for being posted as a Civil Judge, Class I, it is very improbable and we, therefore, agree with this conclusion of the High Court. Finally, on 30-11-1968 the respondent was found fit to be posted as a Civil Judge, Class I and he filed the petition, out of which this appeal arises, for consideration of his name for being promoted as an Additional District & Sessions Judge over the heads of all the people who had been earlier found to have better qualifications for being posted as Civil Judges, Class I in preference to him. That petition having been allowed by the High Court this appeal has filed by certificate by the Registrar of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and the State against the judgment of that High Court.
2. In addition to the point which we have earlier mentioned and agreed with the High Court, his only other contention was that in the list of Civil Judges he was senior to all of them and as there was no provi