JAI GOVIND Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a dispute has been raised about the selection and appointment to the posts of Senior Administrative Officer, Sadar Munserim in the Judgeship of Bareilly and the Sadar Munserim in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly.

(2.) In certain Judgeships of this State, there are posts of Sadar Munserim (hereinafter referred to as 'S.A.O.' and 'S.M.' respectively). The post of S.A.O. is the highest in rank in the establishment of class III employees and the next below the post of S.A.O. is the post of S.M. The post of S.M. is governed by the provisions of Subordinate Civil Court Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947. The post of S.A.O. was created by Government Order dated 19.8.1989 in which it was contemplated that the incumbent who is holding the post of S.M. shall be promoted to the post of S.A.O. Any class III employee in the Judgeship may on the basis of seniority, aspire for appointment on the two key posts of S.A.O. and S.M.

(3.) In the Judgeship of Bareilly, Sri V.K. Saxena was the S.A.O. who was to retire on 31.7.1995. The question of filling the said post arose and consequential arrangement for the post of S.M. was also to be made. There was also a Court of Principal Judge. Family Court in which the post of S.M. in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 was sanctioned. This scale of pay of the post of S.M. of the Principal Judge, Family Court is equivalent to the post of S.M. in the Judgeship. The District Judge, Bareilly was, therefore, required to take decision for appointment on the post of (1) Senior Administrative Officer, (2) Sadar Munserim in the Judgeship and (3) Sadar Munserim. Principal Judge, Family Court at Bareilly. A committee was constituted by the District Judge for the purpose. The Committee screened about a dozen of senior officials of the Judgeship. The following four seniormost officials of the judgeship were :