The need to follow the directive of constituting a Selection Committee consisting of the Chief Justice and four senior most Judges for the interview.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. D.P. Choudhury, J.

1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, assails the notification showing appointment of selected candidates for the post of Additional District Judges passed by the opposite party no. 3.

2. FACTS

The conspectus of the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially appointed as Ad hoc Additional District Judge in the Fast Track Court established under the 11th Finance Commission with effect from 4.2.2004 and thereafter he worked for nine years as such in different places including Malkangiri. While continuing as such, a guideline was issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Brij Mohan Lal –V- Union of India and others; (2012) 6 SCC 502 in order to regularize the service of Additional District Judges of Fast Track Courts in the regular cadre of District Judge in the manner prescribed by Their Lordships. This judgment has also specifically upheld the decision of the Central Government for abolition of Fast Track Courts.

3. Be it stated that in the case of Brij Mohanlal (Supra), Their Lordships have directed to constitute a Selection Committee comprising of Hon’ble Chief Justice and four senior most Judges of the High Court in order to find out the suitability of the candidates, besides other directions. But as alleged in the present case, the opposite party no.3, contravening the directives of the aforesaid decision, conducted the interview in the Full Court where the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice and eight Puisne Judges were present. Not only it violated the directives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court but also the fundamental right of the petitioner under Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19(1) of the Constitution of India.

4. The petitioner and 26 other Ad hoc Fast Tract Court Additional District Judges had appeared the written examination and fifteen out of them including the present petitioner have passed the said written examination. The fifteen officers, who qualified in the written examination, were called to the interview, but unfortunately said interview was conducted by the Full Court in utter violation of the directives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Out of fifteen candidates, fourteen candidates were awarded pass mark in the interview whereas the petitioner, to the ill luck of him, could not qualify in the interview in spite of having nine years of service experience as Ad hoc Additional District Judge under the Fast Track Court Scheme.

5. It is stated that 40% of mark was required to pass in the interview and as the petitioner had already nine years of experience as per the directives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, he got nine marks due to such experience, but 31 marks were required to be added. It is alleged inter alia that the Full Court was consisting of Mr. Justice B.K. Mishra, who was also the Port-Folio Judge (Administrative Judge) of Malkangiri District, being vindictive to the petitioner awarded less mark for which the petitioner could not qualify in the interview. Out of ten questions, maximum questions were put by Mr. Justice B.K. Mishra to the petitioner and Mr. Justice B.K. Mishra took adverse view because of the animosity between one Bijayananda Mishra, Advocate and the petitioner at Athagarh. It is further stated that said Bijayananda Mishra is the cousin of Mr.Justice B.K.Mishra.

6. It is stated that had the directives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court been followed by the opposite party no.3, Mr. Justice B.K. Mishra, who was not a senior Judge, could not have been a member of the Selection Committee and awarded less mark to the petitioner. Apparently due to inclusion of the Port-Folio Judge in the Selection Committee (Full Court), the petitioner could not succeed in the interview and finally was not selected even if he has qualified in the written examinations having secured 4th position. It is stated that since the interview board was not constituted in accordance with the directives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the selection of the regular Additional District Judges rec