THOTA PADMA Vs. HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition has, inter alia, prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of a mandamus directing the respondents herein not to give effect to an order dated 14-8-2001 passed by the 1st respondent.

(2.) The petitioner herein was enrolled as an Advocate on 31-3-1993. She allegedly was practicing in the Metropolitan Criminal Courts at Nampally. She was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor on 16-05-1998. She is still holding the said office. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the State for recruitment to the posts of District & Sessions Judge Grade-II, the petitioner filed an application. The same had been rejected by reason of the impugned order on the ground that she had not completed seven years practice as on 16-8-2000 i.e., the last date of receipt of applications.

(3.) The contention raised by the petitioner is that having regard to the provisions contained in Art. 233 (2) of the Constitution of India, the period during which she had been holding the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor should also be counted towards her practice as a member of the Bar. Clause (2) of Article 233 reads thus: