UMAKANT SHARMA ADVOCATE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above mentioned 11 writ petitions relate to the selection of candidates for recruit ­ment in the U.P. Higher Judicial Service (for short called as 'HJS'). The different petitioners made different prayers in their writ petitions and the prayers cover is ­suance of mandamus -upon the respon ­dents to fill up all existing vacancies in the quota of direct recruit, for a declaration that certain amendments in the U.P. Higher Judicial Service Rules (for short called as the 'Rules') were ultra vires and for quashing a resolution of the Full Court of the Allahabad High Court as regards appointment of direct recruits and promo ­tion of persons belonging to the J.P. Nyayik Sewa (for short called as the 'Nyayik Sewa'). In some cases prayers were made to command the respondents to carve out a fresh select list in view of the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of O.P Garg and Ors, v. State of U.P, as reported in A.I.R. 1991 SC 1202. Most of the petitioners desired that as the number of vacancies for direct recruitment was more than what was shown, they should be appointed as they had taken the examina ­tions for such recruitment and had come out successful, although they were placed below the six nominated for appointment. In one of the writ petitions, the petitioner, Vinod Kumar Verma required implemen ­tation of D.O. letter No. C -39/PA/AR/LKO 1994 dated 5 -3 -1994 and to declare him selected for appointment in the HJS.

(2.) ALL the aforesaid writ petitions were heard together as common points of fact and law arose in these matters. The facts behind these petitions relate to al ­leged anomalies in the process of recruit ­ment to the HJS. In the context of these facts certain provisions of the Rules were also sought to be challenged. Under the provisions of the Constitution of India the power of appointment to the HJS lies with the Governor on recommendation by the High Court and the Rules covering such appointment are contained in the Rules. 1975, as amended from time to time. The sources of recruitment are (1) promotion from members of the Nyayik Sewa, (2) promotion from the cadre of Judicial Magistrates and (3) direct recruitment from the Bar.

(3.) THE Selection Committee, con ­stituted under the Rules, not only selected six persons found fit for the notified vacan ­cies, it had also directed that really the vacancies for direct recruitment were 19 and as only six could be selected in terms of the advertisement, the rest of the posts were to be utilised for promoting eligible candidates from the Nyayik Sewa. This selection was made in exercise of the powers under Rule 8(2) of the Rules as per the report of the Selection Committee.1 The aforementioned report was put up before the Full Court on 18 -11 - 1995 which resolved as follows under Resolu ­tion No. 2dated 18 -11 -1995: