SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(SC) 91

B.C.RAY, E.S.VENKATARAMIAH, A.P.SEN
Indravadan H. Shah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent


Advocates:
C.D.Singh, GIRISH CHANDRA, M.N.SHROFF, P.H.Parekh, T.U.Mehta

Judgment

RAY, J. : - This appeal raises a very short though important question as to the validity and vires of the provisions of Rule 6(4)(i) and Rule 6(4)(iii)(a) of the Gujarat Judicial Service Recruitment (Amendment) Rules 1979. The relevant rules are quoted hereinbelow :-

(i) Appointment to the post of an Assistant Judge shall be made by the Governor in consultation with the High Court by promotion of a person from amongst such persons (comprising of those holding the posts of Civil Judges (Junior Division) and those in the cadre of Civil Judges (Senior Division) whose names have been entered in the Select List referred to in Clause (ii) before they have reached the age of 48 years and continue in that list on the date of appointment;

Provided that no person shall be eligible for such appointment unless he has:-

(a) served for a period of not less than seven years as a Civil Judge (Junior Division); or

(b) worked on civil side for a period of not less than three years if he belongs to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division).

(ii) A Select List of members who are considered fit for appointment by promotion to posts of Assistant Judges shall be prepared annually by Government in con
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top