BEHARIJI DASS, CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SULTANPUR AND OTHERS Vs. CHANDRA MOHAN, CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FATEHPUR, AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGEMENT The question for consideration in these connected appeals is whether certain persons should be prohibited from functioning as District Judges in Uttar Pradesh. The three appeals arise out of a writ petition filed in the year 1967 by Shri Chandra Mohan against the State of Uttar Pradesh and 15 others.

(2.) SEVERAL years ago, the State Government established U. P. Higher Judicial Service. This service consists of two grades: (1) District and Sessions Judges, and (2) Civil and Sessions Judges. Under Article 309 of the Constitution, the Governor framed rules for appointment to U. P. Higher Judicial Service. These rules are known as U. P. Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1953 (hereafter referred to as the Rules). The Rules provide two separate methods for appointment of Civil and Sessions Judges. The first method is by promotion from the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Judicial Branch). The second method is by direct recruitment of advocates and Judicial Magistrates as Civil and Sessions Judges. Under these Rules, a number of persons were appointed to the U. P. Higher Judicial Service between 1953 and 1964.

(3.) THAT writ petition was partly allowed by this Court on 21-2-1966. It was held that Sri Om Prakash was not eligible for appointment to U. P. Higher Judicial Service. In other respects, the petition was dismissed. Sri Chandra Mohan took up the matter in appeal before the Supreme Court. The appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court on 8-8-1966. It was held that Judicial Magistrates were not eligible for appointment as Civil and Sessions Judges. It was further held that the U. P. Higher Judicial Service Rules are constitutionally void, as they contravened Article 233 of the Constitution. The operative part of the judgment of the Supreme Court ran thus:-