SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.
State of U.P. Appellant
Versus
Rafiquddin and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 4023,* 4024, 3736 and 4636 of 1982 and W.P. No. 12818 of 1984, 13047 of 1985 and Transfer Case No. 15 of 1987, D/- 6-11-1987.
AND
Sushil Kumar Srivastava and others, Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
AND
D.P. Shukla and others, Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
AND
Chandra Prakash Aggarwala, Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
AND
Sushil Chand Srivastava, Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
AND
Sh. R. P. Lavania, Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
AND
P. N. Parashar and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
Constitution of India – Article 14, 16, 32, 234 and 226 – Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 – U.P. Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 – Rules 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 15 and 16 – Applications for recruitment - Approved candidates to Government - Public Service Commission inviting applications for recruitment to 85 posts of Munsifs examination appeared out of whom 294 candidates on the basis of their marks in written papers were called for viva voce test – After completion of written and viva voce test Commission submitted a list of approved candidates to Government recommending candidates for appointment to service which shall hereinafter be referred – On receipt candidates State Government requested Commission to recommend some more candidates for appointment to the service as there was shortage of Munsifs and it further suggested that marks in aggregate may be reduced – Held, Seniority of officers recruited to the service is determined on the basis of year of competitive examination under which they are recruited – We have noticed that generally there is a considerable interregnum between holding of examination and appointment of the selected candidates selected examination were appointed while those selected examination were appointed successful candidates examination were appointed – No system was followed in making appointments as some of candidates selected in subsequent examination were appointed earlier to those selected under earlier examination with result those appointed to the service later in time are made senior to those appointed in service earlier in time in accordance causes heart burning and other complications – Order accordingly.
Judgment
SINGH, J. :- These three civil appeals directed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad and four writ petitions filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution raise common questions of law relating to determination of seniority of members appointed as Munsifs in the Uttar Pradesh Nyayik Seva as a result of competitive Examinations of 1970, 1972 and 1973 held under the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Since the appeals and the petitions raise common questions of law they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.
2. On Sept. 3, 1970 a Notification was issued by the Public Service Commission inviting applications for recruitment to 85 posts of Munsifs. In this examination 918 candidates appeared, out of whom 294 candidates on the basis of their marks in written papers, were called for viva voce test. After completion of the written and viva voce test, the Commission submitted a list of approved candidates to the Government on Oct. 25, 1971 recommending the names of 46 candidates for appointment to the service, which shall hereinafter be referred to as the 1st list of 1970 examination. On receipt of the list of 46 candidates the State Government requested the Commission to recommend some more candidates for appointment to the service as there was shortage of Munsifs, and it further suggested that the minimum of 40 per cent marks in the aggregate may be reduced to 35 per cent. The Commission agreed to the State Governments suggestion and thereafter it forwarded another list of 33 candidates on April 25, 1972 for appointment to the service which shall hereinafter be referred to as the IInd list. This list included those who had obtained 35 per cent marks in the aggregate, as well as 35 per cent marks in viva voce. All the 79 candidates, as recommended by the Commission in the aforesaid two lists were appointed to service by different Notifications issued between May, 1972 to 12th June 1973. On July 17, 1973 a Notification was issued determining inter se seniority of all the 79 candidates appointed on the basis of 1970 examination in accordance with their position in the list prepared by the Commission under R. 19 of the Rules. Meanwhile, the Public Service Commission held another competitive examination for appointment to the 150 posts of Munsifs which shall hereinafter be referred to as the 1972 Examination. The written test was held in November, 1973 and the result was declared on 26th June 1974. The Public Service Commission forwarded a list of 150 successful candidates to the Government for appointment to the service under R. 19 of the Rules and all those candidates were appointed to the service on different dates between 1975 to 1977.
3. Some of the unsuccessful candidates of the 1970 Examination made representation to the State Government for considering their case for appointment on the basis of their aggregate marks irrespective of their low marks in the viva voce. The State Government by its letter dt. 24th July, 1973 requested the Commission that in view of the shortage of Munsifs in the State and since in view of the amendment of R. 19 it was no longer necessary for a candidate to qualify independently in the viva voce, it may reconsider the result of the examinations of 1967, 1968, 1969 and 1970 and approve all those candidates for appointment to the service who might have obtained 40 per cent of marks or more in the aggregate even if they might have failed to secure the minimum marks in the viva voce test. The Commission refused to consider the proposal of the Government, as the minimum marks prescribed by the Commission under the then existing proviso to R. 19 could not be ignored in judging the suitability of a candidate. In spite of the Commissions refusal the Government pursued the matter further, and it convened a meeting of the Chief Minister, Chief Justice of the High Court and the Chairman of the Public Se
relied on : Shitla Prasad Shukla v. State of U. P.
distinguished : Durgacharan Misra v. State of Orissa
relied on : Lila Dhar v. State of Rajasthan
A. K. Yadav v. State of Haryana
affirmed : C. Chamabasavaiah v. State of Mysore
Umesh Chandra Shukla v. Union of India
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.