(1.) The petitioners are members of Rajasthan legal Service Consequent upon the judgment of this Court in All India Judges' Association and Ors etc. etc. v, Union of India and Ors. etc. etc. the State of Rajasthan amended rajasthan Judicial Service Rules by Rajasthan judicial Service (Amendment) Rules, 1994 and an additional condition was incorporated in the rules in terms of the directions given in para 20 of the Second Judges case. That direction reads as follows:
(2.) The First National Judicial Pay Commission which was set up as per directions given in Writ Petition No. 1092 of 1989 on 13-11- 1991 has since submitted its report. One of the issues considered in that report also pertains to recruitment to the judicial service at all stages and prescription of qualifications for recruitment as a judicial officer at the lowest rung.
(3.) The petitioners submit that the direction given in paragraph 20 in the Second judges Case (supra) is being interpreted by the state as a restraint on its power to legislate or make amendments to Rajasthan Judicial Service rules relating to qualifications for recruitment. That does not appear to be the intention of the above direction. To allay the apprehension expressed before us, we clarify that observations made in paragraph 20 of the Second judges Case (supra) were not meant to operate as any restraint on the power of the state to legislate, in consultation with the High court, and amend or frame rules pertaining to recruitment to judicial service including prescription of qualifications therefore. However, while framing or amending such rules, we have no doubt that the State as well as the High Court shall keep in mind various pronouncements of this Court as also the suggestions made by the first National Judicial Pay Commission in that behalf. As and when such an amendment is carried out or new rule framed, it would be open to any aggrieved party to question its validity or constitutionality, but at this stage, we express no opinion about it.