P.JYOTHIMANI, N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
P. Senthil Kumaran – Appellant
Versus
The Registrar General High Court, Madras – Respondent
1. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have assailed the same notification issued by the Government, appointing 17 District Judges (Entry Level) on various grounds and hence, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. This is another round of writ petitions filed, of course, now challenging the Government Order issued under Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 2007, by the Government in consultation with the High Court.
3. Originally, in a batch of writ petitions, the notification issued by the Government on 01.07.2010, calling for applications for the posts of District Judges (Entry Level) in respect of 17 vacancies was challenged on various grounds including that, the distribution of 17 vacancies against each category does not include the disabled persons, since as per Section 33 read with Section 2(k) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, they are entitled for 3% reservation; that for short-listing the candidates for viva-voce examination, the manner in which the length of Bar experience was to be taken into consideration
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.