ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SANJAY KUMAR
Sushil Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
High Court of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. In these two writ petitions, we are to address the legality of the selection process of District Judge Cadre in the State of Jharkhand initiated in the year 2022. An advertisement bearing No. 01/2022 was published on 24th March, 2022, inviting applications from the eligible candidates for the said posts. The vacancies specified in the advertisement itself were twenty-two. Appointment procedure to the said posts is guided by the Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service (Recruitment, Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2001 (‘the 2001 Rules’). In the year 2017, the Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service (Recruitment, Appointment and Conditions of Service) Regulation, 2017 (“the 2017 Regulation”) was framed in terms of Rule 11 and Rule 30 of the 2001 Rules for this purpose.
2. On the basis of cut-off marks specified in the advertisement as also in the 2001 Rules, select list of sixty-six persons was published, applying the 1:3 ratio as there were twenty-two published vacancies.
3. The High Court on its administrative side, however, recommended only thirteen candidates for appointment though the vacancies declared were twenty-two. A resolution to that effect was taken in a
Sivanandan C.T. and Others vs. High Court of Kerala
K. Manjusree vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, (2008) 3 SCC 512 [Para 15
Hemani Malhotra vs. High Court of Delhi
Tej Prakash Pathak and Others vs. Rajasthan High Court and Others
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.