CYAN PRAKASH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment of Delhi High Court in C.W. No. 433/90 dated 2-4-1992, this appeal by special leave has been preferred.

(2.) The appellant presently a member of Delhi Higher Judicial Service who presented his case both before the High Court and this Court in person, moved the High Court by filing the said Writ Petition seeking two reliefs (a) that the post of Senior Subordinate Judge which was classified under the Delhi Judicial Service should have been upgraded when the posts of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had been upgraded from Delhi Judicial Service to Delhi Higher Judicial Service in the year 1985 and (b) that the petitioner had, prior to his promotion been discharging the functions of a Senior Subordinate Judge and, therefore, during that time when he was discharging the said functions, he was entitled to pay in the scale of pay applicable to Additional District Judge.

(3.) It appears from the judgment under appeal that the appellant placed reliance on Section 39(3) of Punjab Courts Act which enabled him as a Senior Sub-Judge to hear appeals under certain circumstances and contended that he must be deemed to be discharging the functions of a District Judge at least for the purpose of payment of salary. He also placed reliance on Article 236(a) of the Constitution of India which defines the expression 'District Judge'. It has also been contended before the High Court that in the face of upgrading the post of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the denial of same privilege to the post of Senior Subordinate Judge was arbitrary and unsustainable in law.