IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Incentive that was directed to be given to junior officers working as Civil Judges for promotion as District Judges solely on the basis of merit would be defeated if their seniority in cadre of District Judges is not determined on the basis of their merit in Limited Competitive Examinations.
(2) Reason for introduction of promotion through Limited Competitive Examinations is to improve calibre of members of Higher Judicial Services. Such of those meritorious candidates who have been promoted on the basis of LCE cannot be deprived of their seniority on the basis of merit in examination.

JUDGMENT :

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

Interlocutory Application for impleadment is allowed.

1. The Petitioners are Members of the Higher Judicial Services working as District Judges in the State of Madhya Pradesh. They were appointed to the Higher Judicial Services from 2007 onwards after being selected in the Limited Competitive Examinations (for short, ‘LCE’). They have challenged the resolution of the Administrative Committee of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dated 14.12.2017 by which it was resolved that the merit of candidates in LCE would not be relevant for altering inter se seniority in the feeder cadre. The Full Court resolution by which the resolution of the Administrative Committee dated 14.12.2017 was approved is also assailed in the Writ Petition. The revised gradation list dated 01.02.2019 on the basis of the resolution of the Special Committee is also questioned in the Writ Petition.

2. Initially, there were two sources of recruitment to the Higher Judicial Services, namely by promotion from the members of the Subordinate Judicial Service and by direct recruitment. The final report dated 11.11.1999 by Justice Shetty Commission was considered by this Court in its judgment dated 21.03.2002 in All India Judges’ Association & Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (2002) 4 SCC 247. This Court was of the opinion that an incentive should be provided to the junior officers to improve and compete with each other to get quicker promotion. This Court was also of the opinion that while maintaining 75 per cent appointments to the post of District Judges by promotion and 25 per cent by direct recruitment, there should be two methods of promotion. 50 per cent of the posts in the Higher Judicial Services must be filled up by promotion on the principle of merit-cum-seniority and the remaining 25 per cent of the posts shall be filled up by promotion, strictly on the basis of merit through a limited departmental competitive examination for which the qualifying service of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) shall not be less than five years. The High Courts were directed to frame rules in that regard.

3. The Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter, ‘the 1994 Rules’) was accordingly amended in the year 2005. Rule 5 of the 1994 Rules reads as follows : -

“"Rule 5 - Method of appointment

(a) 50 percent by promotion from among the civil judges (senior division) on the basis of, merit cum seniority and passing suitability test;

(b) 25 percent by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through limited competitive examination of civil judges (senior division) having not less than 5 years qualifying service;

Provided that notwithstanding that a person has passed such competitive examination, his suitability for promotion shall be - considered by the High Court on the basis of his past performance and reputation;

(c) 25 percent of the post shall be filled by the direct recruitment from among the eligible advocates on the basis of the written test and viva-voice conducted by the high court,

Provided that if any post earmarked for direct recruitment remains vacant even after two consecutive selection processes held for that purpose, the same shall be filled by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division), having not less than 7 years of aggregate Judicial service and have attained the age of 35 years and have not attained the age of 48 years as on the 1st January of the year in which application for filling up such vacant posts are invited, strictly on the basis of merit through written examination and viva-voce conducted by the High Court keeping in mind suitability of the candidate on the basis of his past performance and reputation, on the assumption that quota for direct recruitment to the extent of vacant posts has broken, down."

(2) Appointment to the categories (b) and (c) of sub-rule (1) of rule 3 shall be made by the High Court by selection of members of the service from categor