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

1988 Supreme(Raj) 760

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
M.B.Sharma, J.
Laxmi Narain Mathur - Appellant
Versus
High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan and Anr. - Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 545 of 1988.
Decided On : 15-09-1988

The Chief Justice has the power to specify the method of recruitment and qualifications for appointment to various posts in the High Court, including the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration), but the order issued by the Chief Justice must provide criteria or guidelines for determining the interlaced seniority of the two categories of posts.

Headnote:

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT - PROMOTION - DY. REGISTRAR (ADMINISTRATION) - CHANNEL OF PROMOTION - INTERLACED SENIORITY - CRITERIA - GUIDELINES - CHIEF JUSTICE'S POWERS - RULES AND ORDERS - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Private Secretary-cum-judjement Writer, challenged the promotion of the respondent, an Assistant Registrar, to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration) on the ground that the channel of promotion was not properly followed and that the Chief Justice had not laid down any criteria or guidelines for fixing the interlaced seniority of the two categories of posts.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Chief Justice had the power to specify the method of recruitment and qualifications for appointment to various posts in the High Court, including the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration), but that the order issued by the Chief Justice did not provide any criteria or guidelines for determining the interlaced seniority of Assistant Registrars and Private Secretaries-cum-judjement Writers for promotion to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration). The court also held that Rule 4A of the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953, which empowered the Chief Justice to determine the seniority of persons appointed to the same category of posts, did not apply to the case at hand, as the posts of Assistant Registrar and Private Secretary-cum-judjement Writer were not of the same category.

Issues: 1. Whether the Chief Justice had the power to specify the method of recruitment and qualifications for appointment to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration)? 2. Whether the order issued by the Chief Justice provided any criteria or guidelines for determining the interlaced seniority of Assistant Registrars and Private Secretaries-cum-judjement Writers for promotion to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration)? 3. Whether Rule 4A of the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953, applied to the case at hand?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Yes, the Chief Justice had the power to specify the method of recruitment and qualifications for appointment to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration) under Rule 2A of the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953. 2. No, the order issued by the Chief Justice did not provide any criteria or guidelines for determining the interlaced seniority of Assistant Registrars and Private Secretaries-cum-judjement Writers for promotion to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration). 3. No, Rule 4A of the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953, did not apply to the case at hand, as the posts of Assistant Registrar and Private Secretary-cum-judjement Writer were not of the same category.

Final Decision: The court directed the Chief Justice to suitably amend the Rules or to make orders under powers vested in him under the Rules either to lay down guidelines/criteria for promotion and determination of interlaced seniority of Asstt. Registrar & Private Secretaries and judjement Writers for appointment by selection to the post of Dy. Registrar (Admn.) or to lay down the ratio or proportion for appointment by selection to the post of Dy. Registrar (Admn.) from amongst the Asstt. Registrars and Private Secretaries and judjement Writers as he may deem proper.

JUDGMENT

1. The dispute in this writ petition is in respect to the promotion to the post of Dy. Registrar (Administration) and the channel for promotion to the aforesaid post from Assistant Registrar or Private Secretary-cum-judjement Writer (Super-Time Scale). We may state that under order No. Estt/HC/86/30 dated April 5, 1986, the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur has changed the nomenclature of the posts of Private Secretaries cum judjement Writers (Super Time Scale) to that Private Secretaries cum judjement Writers and the suffix Super Time Scale' has been deleted. Similarly the nomenclature of the posts of Private Secretaries cum judjement Writers (Selection grade) and Private Secretaries cum judjement Writers (Ordinary Scale) under the aforesaid order have been changed to Senior Personal Assistant-cum-judjement Writers and Personal Assistant-cum. judjement Writers respectively. The petitioner Laxmi Narain Mathur is Private Secretary-cum-judjement Writer and his designation prior to April 5, 1986 when the aforesaid order was made, was Private Secretary cum judjement Writer (Super Time Scale). The post of Dy. Registrar (Admn.) had fallen vacant as a result of the retirement of Tulsi Ram Soni and under the order dated January 18, 1988 (Annx. 5), Rikhab Raj Kumbhat the then Asstt. Registrar was promoted to the post of Dy Registrar with effect from the date of his taking over charge. The petitioner Laxmi Narain Mathur has challenged the aforesaid appointment by promotion of Shri Rikhab Raj Kumbhat, respondent No. 2.

2. In exercise of his powers conferred by Article 229(2) of the Constitution of India, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan with the approval of the 'Governor' of Rajasthan, made the Rajasthan, High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953 (for short, the Rules). Under Rule 2 thereof the staff attached to the High Court shall consist of the posts specified in the second column of Schedule-I thereto. The posts of Dy. Registrar (Admn.) are the posts at S. No. 7 of the Schedule to the Rules and at S No. 10 are the posts of Private Secretaries attached to Hon'ble the Chief Justice and Hon'ble Judges (Super-time Scale). Earlier there were two posts in Super Time Scale, but by the passage of time the number of such posts has been increased and the posts of Private Secretaries and judjement Writers to Hon'ble the Chief Justice and Judges are equal to their number. It may be stated that at S. No. 11 are the posts of Asstt. Registrars. Rule 2A of the Rules prescribes method of recruitment and one of the methods of recruitment to the posts specified in second column of Schedule-I is by promotion of a person already employed in the High Court Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2A of the Rules empowers the Chief Justice from time to time by general or special order to (a) specify the method by which the recruitment to a post or category of posts shall be made, (b) determine the proportion of vacancies to be filled by each method in case of recruitment by more than one method and (c) specify the manner in which such recruitment shall be made in the case of direct recruitment. Rule 8 is in respect of general promotions and Rule 9 is in respect of promotion to posts carrying special responsibility or requiring special qualifications. The above rules will come up for consideration at the later part of this order. Let us read those rules, they are as under:

"8. Promotion: Subject to the requirements of efficiency promotion shall ordinarily be made according to seniority. An official may receive promotion for recognised merit irrespective of the grade to which he may belong or of his seniority within the grade.

9. Promotion to posts carrying special responsibility or requiring special qualifications:

(1) Not with standing any thing to the contrary contained in these Rules, promotions to the following posts carrying special responsibility or requiring special qualifications shall be made by selection;

(1) De























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top