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

2021 Supreme(SC) 1037

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, SURYA KANT, VIKRAM NATH
Vinod Kumar Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu & Kashmir – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A. K. Ganguli, Sr. Adv., Mr. A. Mariarputham, Sr. Adv., Mr. C. Azad, Adv., Mr. Avneesh Arputham, AOR, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv., M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv., Mr. Devashish Bharukha, Adv., Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv., Ms. Shashi Juneja, Adv., Mr. Satyajeet Kumar, AOR, Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Ms. Taruna Ardhendumauli Prasad, AOR, Ms. Kanu Agrawal, Adv., Mr. Aditya Manubarwala, Adv., Mr. Parth Awasthi, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Sr. Adv., Ms. Avni Sharma, Adv., Ms. Manisha Ambwani, AOR, Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anupam Raina, AOR, Ms. Suveni Bhagat, Adv., Mr. Sunando Raha, Adv., Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv., Ms. Suveni Bhagat, Adv., Mr. Deepak Goel, AOR, Mr. Sanjay R Hegde, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rutwik Panda, AOR, Ms. Nikhar Berry, Adv., Ms. Anshu Malik, Adv., Mr. Arjun Krishnan, AOR, Ms. Prerna Mehta, AOR, Mr. Ram Sankar, Adv., Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi, Adv., Ms. G. Chitrakala, Adv., Mr. G. Jai Singh, Adv., Mr. Aniv Veda Sharma, Adv., Mr. R. V. Kameshwaran, AOR, Mr. Gopal Balwant Sathe, AOR, Mr. Amit Arora, Adv., Mr. Mohd. Asif Ali, Adv., Mr. Ajay Kumar, Adv., Ms. Richa Pandey, Adv., Mr. B.L. Shivhare, Adv., Mr. Yusuf, AOR, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
For the Intervenor : Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR, Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv., Mr. Sahil Tagotra, Adv., Mr. Arjun Krishnan, AOR, Mr. Kaustav Som, Adv.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from a judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir (at Jammu) dated 27 November 2015.

3. The respondents, who are the petitioners before the High Court, qualified at the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Judicial) Examinations 2002 and were appointed as Judicial Magistrates in 2002-03. They were placed higher in the merit list compared to the petitioners. However, the gradation list was prepared by applying the roster for direct recruitment as provided under Rule 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005 1 [2005 Rules]. This in effect led to the reserved category petitioners displacing the general category respondents in the gradation list. The third and fourth petitioners were promoted as Sub-Judge on the basis of their placement in the gradation list. A Writ Petition was filed seeking to quash the gradation list of Judicial Magistrates and for a direction to prepare the gradation list, based on merit. The contention of the respondents before the High Court was that Rule 5 of the 2005 Rules will be applicable only for direct recruitment and not for determination of inter se seniority for the purpose of p

    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