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

1996 Supreme(SC) 470

A. M. AHMADI, K. VENKATASWAMI, M. K. MUKHERJEE
All India Judges Association – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

1. The question of permitting the Legal Assistants working in different institutions other than the courts for the purpose of appointments on the ground that they should be treated as having experience at the Bar cannot be entertained. The Legal Assistants working in different institutions and bodies do not get the experience and exposure which is important for the purpose of manning judicial posts and it is not possible to lay down guidelines on the basis of a few appearances but what is important is not mere appearance but actual intimate knowledge and association with the system itself. We, therefore, reject the applications.

2. Writ Petition No. 51 of 1995 is heard.

3. No order.

4. Disposed of.

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