RAMUS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are all Practising Advocates. As per the Certificates of Enrolment issued to them by the Karnataka State Bar Council, the date on which they have signed the Roll of the State Bar Council and the deemed date of commencement of their legal practice as Advocate are as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_375_KANTLJ2_2002Html1.htm</FRM>

(2.) THE Civil Judges (Junior Division) Selection Committee of High court of Karnataka ('selection Committee' for short) issued a notification dated 8-10-2001 inviting applications for recruitment of candidates for the posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division ). Clause (3) of the Schedule to the Karnataka Judicial Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1983 prescribes the minimum qualifications for the post which is extracted in clause (3)of the said Notification. The relevant portion of clause (3) is extracted below:

(3.) CLAUSE (19) of the said Notification requires the candidates to submit the applications in the prescribed form in duplicate accompanied by the documents enumerated therein. One of the documents to be produced is a certificate from the Presiding Officer of the Court in which he is actually practising (or from the Registrar (Judicial), High Court, in case he is practising in the High Court) indicating the length of his practice. Another document to be produced is the true copy of the Enrolment certificate. Petitioners claim that they applied against the said recruitment notification with the necessary documents.