Recommendation of Shetty Commission is not binding on State or High Court.

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

This case relates to recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) pursuant to Tamil Nadu Judicial Service (Cadre & Recruitment) Rules, 2007, (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 2007). In one of the case, upper age limit of 35 years is under challenge. In the other case, the validity of rules prescribing source of recruitment is under challenge.

2. The condition of service of members of subordinate judiciary was decided by Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges Association – Vs – Union of India reported in (1992) 1 SCC 119. (referred to as All India Judges case – 1). It was followed by a decision in a review petition reported in 1993 (4) SCC 288 (referred to as All India Judges case – 2). Finally, certain directions were issued by Supreme Court in the said case reported in 2002 (4) SCC 247 (referred to as All India Judges case – 3). Pursuant to Supreme Court direction in All India Judges case – 2, Government of India constituted the First National Judicial Pay Commission, known as Shetty Commission, to determine the structure of pay and other emoluments, conditions of service of judicial officers, minimum qualifications, age of recruitment, method of recruitment, etc. Shetty Commission made recommendation and recommended the High Court to frame rules specifying age of retirement, prescribing writing of confidential report, giving common nomenclature to the Judges, equation of posts, recruitment of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) cum Magistrate (First Class), recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), District Judge, minimum and maximum age limit, inter-se seniority, judicial education, training, pay scale, etc. The recommendation of the Commission was accepted by the Supreme Court in All India Judges case – 3, with certain modification and certain directions were issued, which will be discussed at the appropriate stage.

3. Initially, in the State of Tamil Nadu, appointments were being made pursuant to the Tamil Nadu Judicial Service (Cadre & Recruitment) Rules, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1995). There under, minimum age limit of 25 years and maximum 38 years of age limit was prescribed as on 1st July of the year of selection for appointment. After recommendation of the Shetty Commission and in view of the direction of the Supreme Court in All India Judges case – 3, the rule was substituted by the Tamil Nadu Judicial Service (Cadre & Recruitment) Rules, 2007. Therein, maximum age limit was brought down from 38 to 35 years and no provision was made for exemption of higher age limit.

4. The petitioner, K.Venugopal, a member of backward category, on successful completion of B.L. Degree, enrolled in the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, in the year 2000. He was about 29 years old at the time of enrolment. Under Rules, 1995, 4 years of experience having been prescribed, he was not eligible to apply till 2004. Subsequently, there being a ban on recruitment, no appointment was made and by the time the old rule was repealed by Rules, 2007. Now, the age limit prescribed for appointment is 35 years and as per the said age limit, the petitioner, K.Venugopal, is over-aged. The petitioner, K.Venugopal, therefore, challenged the prescription of the maximum age limit of 35 years. One of the ground has been taken that there being ban on recruitment, Tamil Nadu Government, though issued G.O. ms. No.98 dated 17th July, 2006, from its Personnel & Administrative Reforms Department in regard to relaxation of age limit of 5 years, but no such provision for relaxation of age limit has been made under Rules, 2007.

5. According to counsel for the respondents, in view of Supreme Court decision in All India Judges case – 3, freshers to be accommodated and, therefore, taking into consideration all such aspects, the minimum and maximum age limit has been reduced.

6. The only question for determination in the case of the petitioner, K.Venugopal is whether he has any right to claim for