( 1 ) THIS judgment will dispose of separate writ petitions filed by five practising advocates of Delhi seeking appointment to the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge (for short adj ) as members of Delhi Higherjudicial Service (for short service ). One of the petitioners, namely, Mr. Malkhan Singh (CW 1656/86) belongs to scheduled castes community. The other four belong to general category.

( 2 ) IN the petition of Mr. Malkhan Singh and Mr. Sanjay Kaul (CW 3811/91) the three respondents are Union of India, Delhi Administration and Delhi High Court.

( 3 ) IN other three petitions (CW 1797, 1702/92 and CW 3025/91) beside aforesaid respondents, three Additional District and Sessions Judges are also respondents They are Mr. S. N. Aggarwal (Respondent No. 7), Mr. P. K. Bhasin (Respondent No. 8) and Ms. Reva Khetrapal (Respondent No. 9 ). Earlier to their appointment these officers were also practising advocates at Delhi. On 30th November, 1991 they were appointed as ADJ s in compliance with the judgment dated 19th April 1991 in CWP Nos. 613 and 2590 of 1990, order dated 2nd August 1991 on review application No. 2471 of 1991 filed by Mr. S. N. Aggarwal and order dated 26th November 1991 on C. M. No. 5567/91 filed by Mr. P. K. Bhasin in C. W. 613 of 1990 passed by a Division Bench of this-Court. We may first notice the relevant constitutional provisions and the rules governing the recruitment to the Service.

( 4 ) THERE are two sources of recruitment of ADJ s, one of it being direct recruitment from the bar. Article 233 (2) of the Constitution of India inter-alia, provides that an advocate becomes eligible for appointment only when the recommendation is made by the High Court for appointment. The High Court, in the context of Article 233, means the Full Court. The Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 (for short the Rules ) which govern the recruitment, promotion, confirmation, seniority and other conditions of service for officers appointed to the Service were framed vide notification issued on 27th August, 1970. After initial recruitment, the regular recruitment is governed by Rules 7 to 11 of the Rules. Rule 7 lays down two sources for recruitment : (1) by promotion from amongst the officers of the Delhi Judicial Service, and (2) direct recruitment from the bar with the stipulation that the quota for direct recruitment shall not at any time exceed more than l/3rd of the total cadre strength of the service. In these petitions we are concerned with the direct recruitment from the bar. Rule 22 provides that the reservation of posts for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes shall be in accordance with the orders issued by the Central Government from time to tune. Rule 10 provides that the High Court shall before making recommendations to the Administrator invite applications by advertisement and may require the applicants to give such particulars as it may prescribe and may further hold such tests as may be considered necessary.

( 5 ) BY advertisement issued by the High Court in May 1985 applications were invited from practising advocates possessing the requisite qualifications for direct recruitment as ADJ s. The number of vacancies advertised were four and out of them one each was reserved for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes candidates. Mr. Malkhan Singh applied against the post reserved for scheduled castes. Against this post the candidate selected and recommended by the High Court was Mr. Padam Singh who was accordingly appointed as ADJ. None was found suitable for appointment against the post reserved for scheduled tribes and hence, the said vacancy was carried forward and it was decided that the post reserved for scheduled tribes be readvertised in accordance with the instructions on the subject.

( 6 ) BY advertisement dated 18th October 1985 the aforesaid scheduled tribes vacancy was readvertised, inter-alia, notifying that general candidates were also eligible to apply and that