ANIL KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE five petitioners have filed this petition seeking a direction for quashing of the select list prepared by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service, Commission on the basis of examination conducted for the posts of Civil Judges, Class II held on 20th of October 1983 and for a declaration that the examination conducted was not fair and was arbitrary. A direction was also sought that fresh examination be held after giving guide lines to the Public Service Commission.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, petitioners 1 to 4 are Citizens of India and are members of the District Bar Association, Jabalpur, and are practising advocates who have completed more than three years practice at the Bar, and petitioner No.5 is working in the c1erical cadre in the District Court office and is a law graduate.

(3.) IT is alleged that Article 234 of the Constitution provides for recruitment of judicial officers other than District Judges and it is provided that the Governor of the State shall make the appointments in accordance with the rules made by him after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court. It is alleged that in spite of this specific provision in the Constitution the Public Service Commission did not consult the State Government or the High Court for holding a multiple objective type of test for appointment to the post of Civil Judges Class II and it is contended that on this ground the action of the Public Service Commission could not be maintained. It is also alleged that under Article 235 of the Constitution the High Court has control over the sub ordinate judiciary and, therefore, it is necessary that for appointments and recruitment of Civil Judges the requirement of Article 234 has to be fulfilled.