Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Suresh Kumar Kait, CJ and Vivek Jain, J.
Sapna Jhunjhunwala (Smt.) v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Writ Petitions No. 308 of 2016 and 6345 of 2020 (Jabalpur); Decided on 4.4.2025
(1) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- PIL -- maintainability -- service matter -- challenging dispute with regard to service by way of PIL not permissible. (1998) 7 SCC 273, (2020) 18 SCC 673, (2005) 1 SCC 590 and (2013) 4 SCC 465 followed. [Para 7]
(2) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- M. P. Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 -- R. 5(1)(c) proviso -- challenge to validity of proviso to R. 5(1)(c) of Rules -- locus of petitioner -- petitioner participated in examination held in 2016 -- she was not selected because of impugned proviso which erroneously reduced number of seats meant for advocates -- held -- she is aggrieved party -- she can very well challenge validity of impugned proviso because she is directly affected by it. (2019)20 SCC 17 followed. [Para 26]
(3) Interpretation of Statute -- retrospective or prospective operation of law or rule -- language or intention are relevant to see whether legislature intended to give retrospective operation -- if there is no language which suggests legislative intent to give retrospective effect, every law or rule is prospective in operation -- rule is that current law should govern current activities -- law passed today cannot apply to events of the past. [Paras 36 & 39]
(4) Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 (M.P.) -- R. 5(1)(c) proviso -- retrospective or prospective operation of impugned proviso -- impugned proviso provides that if vacancies for direct recruitment are not filled up for two consecutive selection processes then they are to be filled up through promotion amongst eligible Civil Judges (Senior Division) -- proviso itself provides waiting for two consecutive selection processes -- legislative intent was very clear that said proviso shall have prospective operation and would apply only when, even after two consecutive selection processes, posts are lying vacant -- held -- there is no intention or language to suggest that proviso was made applicable retrospectively -- it has prospective operation, which would be applicable on date it came into force.(2021) 10 SCC 210 followed. (2004) 8 SCC 1 distinguished. (2015) 5 SCC 479 referred to. [Paras 37 & 39]
(5) Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 (M. P.) -- R. 5(1)(c) proviso -- Constitution of India -- Art. 233(2) -- challenge to validity of proviso to R. 5(1)(c) of Rules -- held -- in- service candidates cannot participate under quota meant for direct recruitment from Bar -- it would be direct violation of Art. 233(2) -- said proviso is in violation of Art. 233(2) of Constitution -- held further -- in All India Judges' Association [(2002) 4 SCC 247], apex Court specifically fixed quota to be filled up only by three channels -- one is promotion, second is limited competitive examination and third is direct recruitment from Bar -- but respondent No. 2 created fourth channel by breaking down quota meant for direct recruitment only from Bar -- apex Court further observed that clarification in respect of any matter arising out of this decision will be sought only from apex Court and no other Court will entertain the same -- but respondent No.2, before making such significant changes by bringing proviso in R. 5(1)(c) of Rules, did not take any clarification from apex Court, which was the prior condition -- hence, impugned proviso is in direct violation of the judgment of apex Court -- held further -- proviso provides that if quota meant for direct recruitment from Bar is not filled up for two consecutive selection processes, then said posts would be filled up by promotion amongst eligible Civil Judges (Senior Division) -- but without waiting for two consecutive selection processes, respondents applied said proviso in 2016 and 2017 itself -- impugned proviso is violative of Constitutional mandate and judgments passed by apex Court -- proviso quashed -- appointments made in pursuance thereof quashed -- vacant seats falling under quota meant for direct recruitment from Bar shall be filled up in future recruitment. (2002) 4 SCC 247, (2010) 15 SCC 170, AIR 1996 SC 1987, (3) (2008) 17 SCC 703 and (1985) 1 SCC 225 discussed. (2020) 7 SCC 401 distinguished. Civil Appeal No. 3947 of 2020 and Direct Recruitment Class II (1990) 2 SCC 715 referred to. [Paras 58, 61, 66 & 70]
(6) Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 (M.P.) -- R. 5(1)(c) proviso -- proviso quashed -- appointments made in pursuance thereof quashed -- judicial officers appointed under quashed proviso were not at fault -- been serving approximately for 9 years -- it would not be appropriate to revert these judicial officers to their original posts of Civil Judge (Senior Division) -- judicial officers belonging to their batches have already been promoted to post of District Judge in 2018 and 2019 respectively -- petition pending since 2016 -- it would be appropriate on ground of equity that they be placed in their respective batches of 2007 and 2008 -- their inter se seniority shall be fixed as per their gradation list as existed on date of promotion of judicial officers of their respective batches to post of District Judge -- they are not required to pass suitability test. (2008) 7 SCC 153 and (2007) 4 SCC 54 referred to. [Paras 68 to 70]
¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & yksd fgr eqdnek & pyus ;ksX; gksuk & lsok ekeyk & lsok laca/kh fookn esa yksd fgr eqdnes ds ek/;e ls vk{ksi vuqKs; ughaA ¼1998½ 7 ,llhlh 273] ¼2020½ 18 ,llhlh 673] ¼2005½ 1 ,llhlh 590 rFkk ¼2013½ 4 ,llhlh 465 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 7½
¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & e-ç- mPprj U;kf;d lsok ¼HkrhZ rFkk lsok 'krsZ½ fu;e] 1994 & fu- 5¼1½¼x½ ijarqd & fu;eksa ds fu- 5¼1½¼x½ ds ijarqd dh fof/kekU;rk ij vk{ksi & ;kfpuh dk lqus tkus dk vf/kdkj & ;kfpuh us 2016 esa vk;ksftr ijh{kk esa Hkkx fy;k & vkf{kIr ijarqd ds dkj.k mldk p;u ugha gqvk] ftlus vf/koäkvksa ds fy, vk'kf;r LFkkuksa dh la[;k xyr ढax ls de dj nh & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & og O;fFkr i{kdkj gS & og vkf{kIr ijarqd dh fof/kekU;rk ij vo'; gh vk{ksi dj ldrh gS D;ksafd og mlls çR;{kr% çHkkfor gSA ¼2019½ 20 ,llhlh 17 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 26½
¼3½ fof/k dk fuoZpu & fof/k ;k fu;e dk Hkwry{kh ;k Hkfo";y{kh çorZu & fo/kku&eaMy dk vk'k; Hkwry{kh çorZu nsus dk Fkk ;k ugha] ;g ns[kus ds fy, Hkk"kk ;k vk'k; lqlaxr gksrs gSa & ;fn Hkk"kk ,slh ugha gS ftlls Hkwry{kh çHkko nsus dk fo/kk;h vk'k; bafxr gksrk gks] rks çR;sd fof/k ;k fu;e dk çorZu Hkfo";y{kh gksrk gS & fu;e ;g gS fd orZeku fof/k ls orZeku xfrfof/k;k¡ fofu;fer gksuk pkfg, & vkt ikfjr fof/k vrhr dh ?kVukvksa dks ykxw ugha gks ldrhA ¼iSjk 36 ,oa 39½
¼4½ mPprj U;kf;d lsok ¼HkrhZ rFkk lsok 'krsZ½ fu;e] 1994 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-5 ¼1½¼x½ ijarqd vkf{kIr ijarqd dk Hkwry{kh ;k Hkfo";y{kh çorZu & vkf{kIr ijarqd esa micaf/kr gS fd ;fn lh/kh HkrhZ dh fjfä;k¡ yxkrkj nks p;u çfØ;kvksa rd ugha Hkjrha rks mUgsa ik= flfoy U;k;k/kh'kksa ¼ofj"B [kaM½ esa ls inksUufr }kjk Hkjk tkuk gksxk & Lo;a ijarqd esa yxkrkj nks p;u çfØ;kvksa rd çrh{kk djuk micaf/kr gS & fo/kk;h vk'k; vfr Li"V Fkk fd mä ijarqd dk çorZu Hkfo";y{kh gksxk rFkk og rc gh ykxw gksxk tc yxkrkj nks p;u çfØ;kvksa ds i'pkr~ Hkh in fjä iM+s gksa & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & ;g bafxr djus dk dksbZ vk'k; ;k Hkk"kk ugha gS fd ijarqd Hkwry{kh :i ls ykxw fd;k x;k Fkk & mldk çorZu Hkfo";y{kh gS] og ço`Ùk gksus ds fnukad ls ykxw gksxkA ¼2021½ 10 ,llhlh 210 vuqlfjrA ¼2004½ 8 ,llhlh 1 çHksfnrA ¼2015½ 5 ,llhlh 479 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 37 ,oa 39½
¼5½ mPprj U;kf;d lsok ¼HkrhZ rFkk lsok 'krsZ½ fu;e] 1994 ¼e-ç-½ & fu-5¼1½¼x½ ijarqd & Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 233¼2½ & fu;eksa ds fu- 5¼1½¼x½ ds ijarqd dh fof/kekU;rk ij vk{ksi & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & vf/koäkx.k ls lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk'kf;r dksVk esa lsokjr vH;FkhZx.k Hkkx ugha ys ldrs & ;g vuqPNsn 233¼2½ dk çR;{k vfrØe.k gksxk & mä ijarqd ls lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 233¼2½ dk vfrØe.k gksrk gS & vkxs vfHkfu/kkZfjr & v‚y bafaM;k ttsl ,lksfl,'ku ¼2002½ 4 ,llhlh 247] esa loksZPp U;k;ky; us fofufnZ"Vr% ek= rhu ek/;eksa ls Hkjs tkus ds dksVk fu;r fd, & ,d gS inksUufr] nwljk gS lhfer çfr;ksxh ijh{kk rFkk rhljk gS vfèkoäkx.k ls lh/kh HkrhZ & ijarq çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 us dsoy vf/koäkx.k ls lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk'kf;r dksVk foHkkftr dj pkSFkk ek/;e l`ftr dj fn;k & loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh leqfä dh Fkh fd bl fofu'p; ls mn~Hkwr fdlh Hkh fo"k; ds ckjs esa Li"Vhdj.k dh bZIlk loksZPp U;k;ky; ls gh dh tk,xh rFkk vU; dksbZ U;k;ky; mls xzg.k ugha djsxk & ijarq çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 us fu;eksa ds fu- 5¼1½¼x½ esa ijarqd ykdj ,sls egRoiw.kZ ifjorZu djus ds iwoZ loksZPp U;k;ky; ls Li"Vhdj.k ugha ek¡xk tks iqjksHkkO; 'krZ Fkh & blfy, vkf{kIr ijarqd ls loksZPp U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dk çR;{k vfrØe.k gksrk gS & vkxs vfHkfu/kkZfjr & ijarqd esa micaf/kr gS fd ;fn vf/koäkx.k ls lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk'kf;r dksVk yxkrkj nks p;u çfØ;kvksa rd ugha Hkjrk rks mä in ik= flfoy U;k;k/kh'kksa ¼ofj"B [kaM½ esa ls inksUufr }kjk Hkjs tk,¡xs & ijarq çR;FkhZx.k us yxkrkj nks p;u çfØ;kvksa dh çrh{kk fd, fcuk] 2016 vkSj 2017 esa gh mä ijarqd ykxw dj fn;k & vkf{kIr ijarqd laoS/kkfud vkKk vkSj loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ;ksa dk vfrØe.k djrk gS & ijarqd vfHk[kafMr & rn~uqlj.k esa dh xbZ fu;qfä;k¡ vfHk[kafMr & vfèkoäkx.k ls lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk'kf;r dksVk ds varxZr vkus okys fjä LFkku Hkfo"; esa dh tkus okyh HkrhZ ls Hkjs tk,¡xsA ¼2002½ 4 ,llhlh 247] ¼2010½ 15 ,llhlh 170] ,vkbvkj 1996 ,llh 1987] ¼3½ ¼2008½ 17 ,llhlh 703 rFkk ¼1985½ 1 ,llhlh 225 foosfprA ¼2020½ 7 ,llhlh 401 çHksfnrA flfoy vihy Øekad 3947 lu~ 2020 rFkk ¼1990½ 2 ,llhlh 715 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 58] 61] 66 ,oa 70½
¼6½ mPprj U;kf;d lsok ¼HkrhZ rFkk lsok 'krsZ½ fu;e] 1994 ¼e-ç-½ & fu- 5¼1½¼x½ ijarqd & ijarqd vfHk[kafMr & rnuqlj.k esa dh xbZ fu;qfä;k¡ vfHk[kafMr & vfHk[kafMr ijarqd ds v/khu fu;qä U;kf;d vf/kdkfj;ksa dh dksbZ xyrh ugha & yxHkx 9 o"kksZ ls lsokjr & bu U;kf;d vf/kdkfj;ksa dks flfoy U;k;k/kh'k ¼ofj"B [kaM½ ds muds ewy in ij çR;kofrZr djuk leqfpr ugha gksxk & muds cSp ds U;kf;d vf/kdkjh Øe'k% 2018 rFkk 2019 esa ftyk U;k;k/kh'k ds in ij inksUur fd, tk pqds & ;kfpdk 2016 ls yafcr gS & lkE;k ds vk/kkj ij leqfpr gksxk fd mUgsa 2007 vkSj 2008 ds vius&vius cSpksa esa j[kk tk, & mudh ijLij T;s"Brk muds vius&vius cSpksa ds U;kf;d vf/kdkfj;ksa dh ftyk U;k;k/kh'k ds in ij inksUufr ds fnukad dks ;Fkk fo|eku mudh inØe lwph ds vuqlkj fu;r dh tk,xh & muds }kjk mi;qärk ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ dh tkuk vko';d ughaA ¼2008½ 7 ,llhlh 153 rFkk ¼2007½ 4 ,llhlh 54 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 68 ls 70½
ORDER
Kait, C.J. : 1. Petitioner, who is a practicing advocate, has filed W.P.No.308/2016 seeking the following reliefs :--
7.1 Summon the entire relevant record from the possession of the Court below;
7.2 Upon holding that the inaction of the respondents authorities in not calculating the correct number of vacancies for appointment to the post of District Judge (Entry Level) against the 25% of Advocates' quota for the year 2016 as bad in law, command the respondents to add 74 unfilled vacancies of the Examination Year, 201 2015, in the Examination Year, 2016 with all consequential benefits arising thereto; if necessary set aside the advertisement contained in Annexure P/1.
7.3 Further command the respondents to display the numbers obtained by the candidate in the pre pre-examination/screening examination/screening test in the official website to bring in transparency in the system. 7.4 Any other order/orders as deems fit by this Hon'ble Court.
7.4 Award cost of the litigation in favour of the petitioner.
7.5 Set aside Rule 5 sub-rule 1 after clause 'c' is arbitrary, unjust, unlawful and against the directives issued by the Hon'ble apex Court in the matter of All India Judges Association & others.
7.6 Advertisement dated 23.11.2015 (Annexure P/5) for 2016 HJS Exam (Civil Judge Senior Division) and its results (Annexure P/6) be set aside, by issuing issuing writ in the nature of certiorari.
7.7. Direct that seats advertised in 2017 HJS Exam (Bar) be increased in appropriate manner, by issuing writ in nature of mandamus. In alternative, the petitioner is praying that advertisement dated 16.3.2017 (Annexur (Annexure P/10) and its results dated 22.3.2018 (Annexure P/11) be set aside, by issuing writ in the nature of certiorari.
7.8 Advertisement dated 24.3.2017 (Annexure P/8) for 2016 HJS Exam (Civil Judge Senior Division) and its results (Annexure P/9) be set aside, by issuing writ in the nature of certiorari.
7.9 To set aside all appointments made in pursuance of proviso to Rule 5(1)(c) of the Rules of 1994.
2. Petitioner, who is a senior advocate of this Court, has also filed Writ Petition No.6345/2020 as a Public Interest Litigation praying for following reliefs :--
(i) That the proviso to rule 5(1)(c) of Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2017 may be declared as ultra-vires and be deleted from the said Rules;
(ii) That the concerning office of the High Court may be directed to ascertain the actual number of 25% posts in Higher Judicial Services meant for the eligible 'Advocates' since the inception of quota system from the year 2007 and those posts may be filled only from candidates who fall in the definition of eligible 'Advocate' as laid down in the referred Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court.
(iii) That the inservice candidates/judges occupying the post meant for the Bar through promotion or direct recruitment, may be identified and reverted to their original posts.
(iv) That the ineligible candidates selected and appointed directly rectly in the Higher Judicial Services, who were not in continuous practice at Bar, may be removed from the services, as ineligible (not qualified}.
(v) That the Civil Judges promoted through merit cum seniority (suitability) and Limited Competitive Examination (L.C.E.) in excess of the quota of 50% and 25% (later 10%) respectively may also be reverted to their original post.
(vi) The roster system may be implemented for granting the benefit to the selected members of the Bar in the Higher Judicial Services since 2007 through direct recruitment.
(vii) That the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in All India Judges Association (supra), Dhreej Mor (supra) and High Court of Punjab and Haryana v. State of Punjab (2019) 12 SCC 496 may be implemented in its letter and spirit.
This Hon'ble Court be further pleased to pass such other orders as it may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. At t
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....
The High Court's revision of eligibility criteria for judicial promotions, requiring separate minimum marks in written and viva voce, is valid, distinguishing between different recruitment methods wh....
The court asserted that under the UPHJS Rules, there is no provision for carrying forward unfilled reserved vacancies into subsequent recruitment years, thus upholding existing appointment processes ....
Point of law: Article uses the word “sha ”, which obviously gives a mandatory colour to the said Article. There fore, once the law has been declared by the Apex Court, it becomes the law of the land
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
