CHANDRA MOHAN Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court under Article 132 and 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution, is directed against an appellate judgment of January 6, 1969, of the High Court of Allahabad. It arises out of these facts:

(2.) U. P. Higher Judicial Service had two grades: (1) District and Sessions Judges and (2) Civil and Sessions Judges. Under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution the Governor framed rules governing recruitment and other conditions of this service. The rules are known as U. P. Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1953 (hereinafter called the 1953 Rules). Under the 1953 Rules, the appointment of Civil and Sessions Judges was made by two separate methods. The first method was by promotion from the U.P. Civil Service (Judicial Branch). The second method was by recruitment of Advocates and Judicial Magistrates as Civil and Sessions Judges. Under the 1953 Rules a number of persons were appointed to U. P. Higher Judicial Service between 1953 and 1964.

(3.) The appellant, Chandra Mohan, is a permanent member of the U. P. Civil Service (Judicial Branch). In the year 1965, he was officiating as Civil and Sessions Judge. Since he apprehended that direct recruitment of Advocates and Judicial Magistrates to the Service would adversely affect the chances of his confirmation and promotion, he filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the 1953 Rules and the appointments thereunder, of Advocates and Judicial Magistrates, to the Service. The writ petition was partly allowed by the High Court of February 21, 1966. It was held that Shri Om Prakash respondent was not eligible for appointment to the U. P. Higher Judicial Service.