JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an applicant to the post of Special Public Prosecutor under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , in short “POCSO Act”.

2. Petitioner claims to be an advocate practicing in Idukki District Centre, mainly in the criminal courts and also the Courts established under the POCSO Act. Ext.P1 notification was issued by the third respondent dated 06.06.2017 regarding the preparation of a list of persons qualified to be appointed as Special Public Prosecutor under section 32(2) of POCSO Act in the Special Court at Idukki. Ext.P2 is the gist of Ext.P1 issued to the District Court and the notice was published as Ext.P3. Pursuant to Ext.P2, petitioner submitted his bio-data enclosing the certificates evidencing his duration of practice. Subsequently, he came across Ext.P5 dated 14.06.2017 addressed to the District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor ,Thrissur requesting him to submit a panel of advocates for considering them for appointment as Special Public Prosecutor under section 32(2) of the POCSO Act. Petitioner contends that section 45 of the POCSO Act enables the Central Government to make Rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act.

No Rule