Back
S. VAIDYANATHAN, K. RAJASEKAR
B. Jeevan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to accept the petitioner''s resignation w.e.f. 20.04.2023 and to formally relieve the petitioner from service as Civil Judge (Junior Division) and to direct the respondents to accept the application of the petitioner pursuant to Notification No.01/2023, dated 01.07.2023, for the post of District Judge (Entry Level) – Direct Recruitment for Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service, by relaxing Clause (3) of the qualification prescribed under Rule 8 pertaining to District Judge (Entry Level) at Sl.No.3 and to permit him to participate in the selection proces as per Notification No.01/2023, dated 01.07.2023.)
1. Petitioner, who was enrolled as an Advocate in the year 2005, joined the post of Junior Civil Judge in Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service on 19.06.2019, pursuant to the Notification of the year 2018. On 19.01.2023, he submitted his resignation to the first respondent - Principal Secretary, Home Department, through the fourth respondent - Registrar General. Thereafter, Notification No.01/2023, dated 01.07.2023, was issued by the Government for re
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of continuous practice as an advocate immediately preceding the date of the application for appointment as a District Judge.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the eligibility criteria for appointment as a District Judge, requiring an Advocate to be in practice for not less than 7 years, must be st....
Point of law : Article 309 of the Constitution of India deals with the recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Union or a State. The Article 309 provides the competence for the G....
An advocate ceases to practice when engaged in full-time employment, rendering them ineligible for judicial recruitment under Article 233(2) of the Constitution.
The court affirmed the constitutionality of differentiating qualifications for different classes of candidates in judicial appointments, provided there is no discrimination within a class.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
