The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure for shortlisting candidates for interview should be rational, reasonable, non-arbitrary, and non-discriminatory, and the right to apply for a post does not guarantee the right to be called for an interview.

R. V. RAVEENDRAN, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners in these three writ petitions are applicants for the post of District Judges in response to the notification dated 5-9-1995 issued by the respondent (High Court of Karnataka) under Article 233 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Kamataka Judicial Services (Recruitment) rules, 1983 ('rules' for short) inviting applications for the purpose of recommending the appointment of 11 members of the bar, by direct recruitment. The said notification specifies the following minimum qualification for such direct recruitment, in accordance with Article 233 and Rule 2 (Category 2) of the rules: (A) The applicant must be a holder of a degree in law from any recognised University. (B) The applicant must be practising on the last date fixed for submission of application as an Advocate and must have so practised for not less than seven years as on such date. (C) The applicant must not have attained the age of 48 years on the last date fixed for submission of applications. The notification instructs those who are desirous of being considered for appointment to these posts, to furnish the particulars in the prescribed form of application and that those who are called for interview, will have to appear before the interview a committee in the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore.

( 2 ) THE petitioners claim that they fulfil the eligibility criteria specified in the said notification. They, therefore, contend that they ought to have been called for interview. Their common grievance is that while several other applicants have been called for interview, they have not been called for interview. They contend that once they fulfil the criteria specified in the notification, their applications cannot be ignored or rejected; nor can they be eliminated from the process of selection without being subjected to an interview which is the only method/procedure specified for selection in the notification; and that if other criteria had been applied for eliminating them, such a process would be illegal as such criteria were neither notified nor intimated to the applicants. It is also contended that the authority entrusted with selection cannot prescribe any condition other than those prescribed in Article 233 and the rules. Hence, they have filed these petitions seeking a direction to the respondent to consider their applications by calling them for interview for selection to the post of District Judges. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 4962 of 1996 has also sought a declaration that non-consideration of his application is arbitrary and illegal.

( 3 ) THE facts and contentions set out in the objections of the respondent are briefly as follows:3. 1. The rules have been framed by the High Court in exercise of its power conferred under Articles 233, 234 and proviso to article 309. The minimum qualifications specified in the notification for recruitment of District Judges are in accordance with said rules. The note to the rule relating to method of recruitment and minimum qualifications for District Judges provides that the High Court may, subject to the said rules, adopt such procedure as it deems fit, for selecting the candidates by direct recruitment. This gives liberty to settle the procedure for the purpose of selecting the candidates. 3. 2. By notification dated 5-9-1995, applications for the post of district Judges, were invited. The prescribed application form requires the candidates to give the annual income (both gross and taxable) from the profession during the preceding three years. If the applicant is an income-tax assessee, he is required to submit the income-tax returns and assessment orders for the preceding three years; and if no assessment order is passed, a declaration to that effect. After the last date for receipt of applications (16-10-1995), the Full Court at its meeting on 9-11-1995, authorised the Hon'ble Chief Justice to constitute a committee of Judges. Accordingly, a Recrui

Click Here to Read the rest of this document