P.K. Balasubramanyan, Ag.C.J.

1. The petitioners applied pursuant to the notification issued by the High Court of Kerala, inviting applications from qualified candidates for appointment to the post of Munsiff-Magistrate in the Kerala Judicial Service. The qualifications prescribed by Clause.4 of the notification in so far as it is relevant, is as follows:

"4. Qualifications :

(i) Direct recruitment. - No person shall be eligible for appointment as Munsiff- Magistrate by direct recruitment unless he is a graduate in Law or a Barrister-at-Law and a practising Advocate having a standing at the Bar for a period of not less than five years.

But a practising Advocate who is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe shall be eligible for appointment as Munsiff-Magistrate if he is having practice at the Bar for a minimum period of not less than three years.

(ii) Recruitment by transfer.- No person shall be eligible for appointment as Munsiff-Magistrate by transfer unless he has practised as an Advocate for a period of not less than three years prior to his appointment to any one or more of the feeder categories mentioned below and has functioned at least for a period of two years in any one or more of the feeder categories, excluding the period of service, if any, not counting for probation.

A person who is otherwise qualified for appointment by transfer but is not holding any of the posts enumerated below at the time of his application for appointment by transfer, shall be eligible for appointment if he has held any one or more of such posts at any time, for the prescribed number of years and is holding a post in a higher scale of pay in any of the offices from which appointment is to be made. Note.- Save as otherwise provided, eligibility shall be determined with reference to the last date fixed for the receipt of applications.

Feeder Categories of officers for recruitment by transfer :

(i) Assistant Public Prosecutors Grade I & II;

xxx xxx xxx xxx"

The petitioner in O.P. 23132 of 2001 had not completed five years of practice when he took up temporary appointment as Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Chengannur. That was on 13.7.2000. Therefore, on the relevant date, he had also not completed the period of two years as contemplated by sub-clause (ii) of Clause.4 of the notification, in that he had not functioned at least for a period of two years in the feeder category. The petitioner in O.P. 23291 of 2001 also had not completed five years of practice at the Bar before he took temporary employment as Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II on 6.11.2000. On the relevant date, both the petitioners were working as Assistant Public Prosecutors Grade II.

2. The applications of the petitioners pursuant to the notification were rejected by the High Court on the ground that the petitioners were not practising as Advocates as stipulated in the notification and on the further ground that they did not belong to any of the prescribed feeder categories. These rejections are challenged in these Original Petitions.

3. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioners do not have practice for a period of five years as Advocates. Before the completion of that period, they have also taken up the posts of Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II, though temporarily. They had not completed two years in those posts. What the petitioners urge is that merely because they have taken up the position of Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II, they did not cease to be practising advocates having a standing at the Bar and the period during which they are functioning as Assistant Public Prosecutors Grade II should also be added on to the earlier period in which they were practising as advocates and if the periods are added up, they would satisfy the five year period of practice envisaged in the notification prescribing qualifications. The petitioners rely on the decision in Sushama Suri v. Govt. of National Capital Ter