MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Natesan, J
Mohambaram A. v. M. A. Jayavelu
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appointment process for public prosecutor (Para 2 , 3 , 9) |
| 2. importance of public prosecutor qualifications (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. binding nature of r.45 of criminal rules of practice (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. quo warranto jurisdiction principles (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. violation of nomination rights (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. clarity on the term nomination in appointments (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. limits of executive discretion in appointments (Para 18 , 20) |
| 8. extraneous considerations in appointments (Para 19 , 21 , 22) |
| 9. quashing of inappropriate appointments (Para 24 , 25) |
1. I have had the advantage of perusing the judgment of my learned brother, which discusses all relevant aspects of these Writ Appeals, in considerable detail. I am in entire agreement with his conclusions, and, if I am appending a brief, separate judgment, it is only because of the importance of the vital aspect.
2. The facts on the record themselves are incontrovertibly established, and, indeed, there are no two views permissible on the facts. Briefly stated, in making the appointment of the first respondent to the office of the Public Prosecutor, North Arcot Sessions Division, the State was not appointing a person who had been n
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.