(1.) The Petitioner, a Law Graduate and enrolled as an Advocate on the rolls of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry on 6/9/2014, has filed this Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Declaration declaring Column (4) against Clause (iii) in Column (3) in the Annexure to Rule 8 of the Puducherry Judicial Service (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 2008 as amended vide G.O.Ms.16/2016/LD, dtd. 3/8/2016 as ultra vires the Constitution and hence, it is null and void to the extent that they prescribe attainment of the age of 35 years as an eligibility to be appointed as District Judge (Entry Level) by Direct Recruitment.
(2.) The Second Respondent, vide Notification No.41/2023, dtd. 8/3/2023, invited Applications for the post of District Judge (Entry Level) Direct Recruitment for Puducherry Judicial Service. As per the said Notification, a Candidate shall be recruited as a District Judge upon qualifying a preliminary examination, main examination and viva voce. But, as per Item 2 of the Notification titled "Qualification", a person shall be eligible to apply for being recruited as a District Judge, if he/she has attained the age of 35 years, possesses a Degree in Law of a University in India, enrolled as an Advocate in the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu or in any other State, must be practising as an Advocate on the date of publication of the Notification and must have so practised for a period of not less than seven years as on such date.
(3.) Though the Petitioner has got eight years and six months of practise as an Advocate and there are vacancies in the post of District Judge in the Union Territory of Puducherry vide Notification No.41/23, dtd. 8/3/2023 issued by the Second Respondent, she could not apply for the same in view of the prescription of attainment of the age of 35 years as eligibility for the appointment as per the Puducherry Judicial Service (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 2008. Hence, challenging the said provision, the Petitioner has come up with this Writ Petition.