K NCHANDRA SEKHARA Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the purpose of making appointments to the posts of Munsiffs in the judicial Service of the State of Mysore, the State Public Service Commission, which will be referred to as the Commission, conducted a competitive examination which commenced on December 20, 1960, and continued till March 10, 1951. There were 229 candidates but it was announced by the Commission by a notification which it made on May 22, 1961, that only fiftytwo had succeeded. Their names were published in the order of merit. The petitioners who took the examination but did not succeed challenge the notification as one made without lawful authority.

(2.) The examination was conducted under Rules made for that purpose by the Governor of the State under Article 234 and the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. Those rules which were intituled the Mysore Munsiffs Recruitment Rules, 1958, will be referred to as the Rules. Rule 3 of those Rules directed the appointments to the cadre of Munsiffs to be made either by a competitive examination or by promotion. Rule 4 enumerated the disqualifications and Rule 5 the conditions of eligibility. Rule B required the competitive examination to consist of a written examination and a viva voce examination, conducted by the Commission, and directed that the aggregate marks obtained In these two examinations should form the basis for the preparation of the list of successful candidates. That applications for the competitive examination should be invited by open advertisement was the requirement of Rule 7. Rule 9 prescribed the procedure for making promotions. Rule 10 made it the duty of the Commission to make arrangements for the conduct of the examination. Rule 12 enjoined the Commission to publish the list of successful candidates in the order of merit, so that appointments may be made in that order. Rule 13 directed the list so prepared to be in. operation for a year. Rule 14 prescribed a period of probation and Rule 15 empowered the termination 01 the services of an unsuitable probationer. Rule 16 which is also a saving rule declared that those rules which permitted appointments by promotion shall stand repealed after the expiry of a period of three years. These Rules end with a schedule which contains what is called a 'Syllabus' specifying the subjects for the examinations and the maximum marks therefor. The maximum fixed for the written examination was 300 and that for the viva voce examination was 200.

(3.) Under Rule 7, a notification was first published on July 11, 1959, calling for applications and was followed up by another on August 30, 1980. It was declared that it was unnecessary for those who had presented applications in response to the first notification to apply again.