Kerala High Court
Renil N vs The Registrar on 20 January, 2023
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 30TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 26456 OF 2013
PETITIONER:
RENIL N.
S/O.SREEDHARAN, AGED 39 YEARS, ADVOCATE, GEETHANJALI
HOUSE, P.O.PURAMERI, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673
503.
BY ADV SRI.R.SUDHISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGISTRAR, (RECRUITMENT & COMPUTERISATION)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
2 THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695
001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.KRB.KAIMAL (SR.)
B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 26456 of 2013
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2023
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:
i. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the first and second respondents to formulate a permanent scheme and guidelines for the selection procedure to the post of the District judges through Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examinations.
ii a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the to first and second respondents to report all existing vacancies of District Judges in the state for direct appointment from the bar.
iii. to declare that the hon'ble judges of this Hon'ble Court or other persons holding higher posts than the district judges alone are competent to evaluate answer scripts in Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examinations.
iv. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013 3 order or direction to the first and second respondent that to strictly follow the ratio in the appointment of District judges by transfer and direct recruitment from bar as per the Rules by taking into consideration all the post of the District Judges including that of Motor accident Claim Tribunal, Family Court Labour Court, Special Judges Court and various Tribunals Excluding Fast Track Courts.
2. The main prayer in the writ petition is for issuing appropriate direction to respondents 1 and 2 to formulate a permanent scheme and guideline for the selection procedure to the post of District Judges for Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examination. A counter affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the counter affidavit:
7. The selection process with respect to the post of District & Sessions Judge in the Kerala State Higher Judicial Service is guided by Special Rules, the Scheme of Examination and the Procedure for the Test prescribed for the Kerala State Higher Judicial Service Examination. It is true that the Scheme of Examination and the Procedure for the Test were being modified in the previous selections. The modifications were made for facilitation of the selection WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013 4 process and to ensure sufficient number of talented candidates in the merit list, taking into account the change in circumstances. From 2007 selection onwards, there is dearth of candidates in the merit list. This prompted the respective Recruitment Committees to amend the Scheme of Examination and Procedure for the Test so as to fill the maximum number of vacancies from among the best qualified hands.
8. In Siraj Vs. High Court of Kerala 2006(2) KLT 923 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that since the High Court is the best Judge of what should be the proper mode of selection, it is left to the High Court to follow such procedure as it deems fit. The Hon'ble Court also observed that it is clearly open for the High Courts to prescribe bench marks for the written test and oral test in order to achieve the purpose of getting the best available talent.
9. It is submitted that during the 2011 selection of District & Sessions Judges, the answer paper valuation work was conducted by the Hon'ble Judges of High Court of Kerala and it took six months period to complete the valuation. The main reason behind the delay in getting the answer papers get valued was the hectic work schedule of the Hon'ble Judges both on judicial and administrative sides. As the valuation work was conducted by the Hon'ble High Court Judges, a centralized valuation was not possible WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013 5 without affecting their judicial work. During the 2012 selection of District Sessions Judges, the Recruitment Committee had taken note of the delay occurred in the previous selection and arrived at the conclusion that the work of valuation of answer papers is undertaken by the Hon'ble Judges of High Court, it would cause delay in completing the work and therefore decided to conduct a centralized valuation deploying senior Judicial Officers in the cadre of District Judges. As per the Kerala State Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1961 or the Scheme of the Examination or the Procedure for the Test, there is no provision stipulating that the answer papers are to be valued only by the Hon'ble Judges of the High Court. The allegations in the Writ Petition against the valuation conducted by the District Judges are baseless and figments of imagination by the petitioner and are only to be rejected.
10. The syllabus for written examination and cut off marks for qualifying for interview are announced in every notification and the pattern of questions is published in the website well in advance and the examinations are conducted accordingly. There cannot be a fixed syllabus, cut off marks and pattern of questions for all the examinations to come, since changes may be required to meet the changing circumstances and the Recruitment Committee will decide on the same prior to every selection. No WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013 6 prejudice will be caused to the petitioner or any one on that account.
From the above affidavit, it is clear that the grievance of the petitioner is redressed. In the light of the same no further order is necessary.
Recording the above counter affidavit this writ petition is closed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE Raj 20.01.2023.
WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26456/2013 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE 'THE HINDU' DAILY DATED 27.09.2013.