Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Malik Mazhar Sultan vs U.P. Public Service Commission Through ... on 17 January, 2019
Bench: Chief Justice, L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjay Kishan Kaul
1
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.1 SECTION III-A/PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1867/2006
MALIK MAZHAR SULTAN & ANR. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
[FOR STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (HIGH COURT OF MP), MADRAS (HIGH COURT
OF MADRAS), ODISHA (HIGH COURT OF ORISSA), BIHAR (HIGH COURT OF
PATNA) AND PUNJAB AND HARYANA (HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA)
ALONG-WITH STATE OF KARNATAKA (HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA) AND KERALA
(HIGH COURT OF KERALA)]
[IA 152/2016-APPLN. FOR DIRECTIONS,
IA 153/2017-APPLN. FOR PERMISSION FOR VARIATION IN TIME ,
IA 117790/2017-APPLN. FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTION,
IA 70330/2018-EXTENSION OF TIME
IA 70324/2018-EXTENSION OF TIME
IA 77756/2017- APPLN. FOR INTERVENTION
IA 178581/2018 – INTERVENTION APPLICATION
IA 183142 AND 31/2019 – INTERVENTION AND EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
APPLICATIONS
IA 186082/2018 – INTERVENTION APPLICATION
IA 8191 AND 8198 OF 2018 – INTERVENTION AND DIRECTIONS
APPLICATIONS]
WITH
SMW(C) NO. 1/2017 (PIL-W)
SMW(C) NO. 2/2018 (PIL-W)
(MR. SHYAM DIVAN, SR. ADV., MR. K.V. VISHWANATHAN, SR. ADV., MR.
VIJAY HANSARIA, SR. ADV. AND MR. GAURAV AGRAWAL,ADV. RESPECTIVELY
HAVE BEEN APPOINTED AS AMICUS CURIAE IN THE INSTANT MATTER)
Date : 17-01-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VINOD LAKHINA
Date: 2019.01.18
18:25:35 IST
Reason:
2
AMICUS CURIAE
State Of U.P., Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
Maharashtra,Goa W.B. Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv.
Chhattisgarh, Delhi
N.E.States (excluding
Tripura)
Gujarat, H.P., Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv.
J&K, Jharkhand, Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Adv.
Karnataka, Kerala
M.P., Odisha, Patna, Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv.
Punjab & Haryana Ms. Sneha Kalita, Adv.
Mr. Avnish Pandey, Adv.
Rajasthan, Sikkim, Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.
Telangana, A.P.,
Tripura, Uttarakhand
SMW© 1/17 Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.(AC)[N/P]
Ms. Remya Raj, Adv.
For Parties :
TNPSC Ms. Purbitaa Mitra, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Vijayakumar, AOR
State of Karnataka & Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR
HC of Karnataka Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi, Adv.
Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv.
Mr. K.P. Singh, Adv.
Mr. C.B. Gururaj, Adv.
High Court of Kerala Mr. P.N. Ravindran, Sr. Adv.
Mr. T.G. Narayanan. Nair, Adv.
With
Shri K. Haripal, Registrar General
Shri Venu Karunakaran, Registrar (Vig.)
State of Kerala Mr. G. Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Jishnu M.L., Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Prakash, Adv.
Ms. Beena Prakash, Adv.
3
KPSC Mr. Vipin Nair, Adv.
Mr. P.B. Suresh, Adv.
Mr. Karthik Jayashankar, Adv.
State of Kerala Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR
Ms. Nayantara Roy, Adv.
State of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv.
HC Gujarat Mr. A.P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
State of H.P. Mr. Vikas Mahajan, AAG
Mr. vinod Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
H.P. High Court Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR
HC of P & H Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ashok Mathur, Adv.
J&K High Court Mr. Bharat Sangal, AOR
State of J&K Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, AOR
Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gautam Parbhakar, Adv.
Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan, Adv.
Jharkhand High Court Mr. Krishnanand Pandey, AOR
Mr. Rao K.R., Adv.
Jharkhand PSC Mr. Jamnesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR
State of Jharkhand Mr. Jayesh Gaurav,
Mr. Gopal Prasad, AOR.
State of Jharkhand Mr. Anil K. Jha, AOR
State of Jharkhand Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv.
4
State of W.B. Mr. Suhaan Mukerji, Adv.
Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Amit Verma, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Manchanda, Adv.
Ms. Kajal Dalal, Adv.
Ms. Dimple Nagpal, Adv.
M/s. P.L.R. Chamber & Co., AOR
Calcutta High Court Mr. Soumya Chakraborty, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR
Mr. Saurav Gupta, Adv.
M/o Law & Justice &
GNCT of Delhi Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG
Mr. Aman Lekhi, ASG
Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv.
Mr. R. Balasubramaniam, Adv.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, AOR
Mr. B.V. Balaram Das, AOR
Mr. Aman Lekhi, ASG
Mr. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. R. Balasubramaniam, Adv.
Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv.
Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kr. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Pankaj Pandey, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv.
Gauhati High Court Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sneha Kalita, AOR
M.P. High Court Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR
Mr. Devansh Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.
Ms. Kanika Saran, Adv.
Mr. Ankur Yadav, AOR
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
5
Patna High Court Mr. Pravin H. Parekh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Kshatrashal Raj, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Prasad, Adv.
Ms. Tanya Chaudhry, Adv.
Ms. Pratyusha Priyadarshini, Adv.
For M/s. Parekh & Co.
Mr. R.N. Venjrani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Mr. S.K. Rajora, Adv.
Mr. T.V. George, AOR.
State of Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv.
Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv.
M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR
State of Goa Mr. Jai Dehadrai, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Rebello, Adv.
Ms. Shivangini Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Sidharth Arora, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Sristi, Adv.
Ms. Manisha Ambwani, AOR.
Manipur High Court Ms. Sneha Kalita, AOR
Orissa High Court Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Niranjan Sahu, Adv.
State of U.P. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prakash Gautam, Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tyagi, AOR
GNCTD Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR.
Ms. Neha Sangwan, Adv.
Mrs. Mahima C. Shroff, Adv.
State of Haryana Mr. Sanjay Kr. Visen, AOR
Meghalya High Court Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, AOR
Ms. Shashi Pathak, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Pathak, Adv.
UPPSC Mr. Shrish Kr. Misra, AOR
State of Uttrakhand Ms. Rachana Srivastva, AOR
6
State of Bihar Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR.
Mrs. Bihu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Adv.
Chhattisgarh High Court Mr. Apoorv Kurup, AOR
State of Tripura Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Kabir Shankar Bose, Adv.
State of Assam Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Somnath Banerjee, Adv.
State of Odisha Mr. Surya Prasad Misra, Adv. Gen., Odisha
Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR
State of Manipur Mr. Leishangthem Roshmani, AOR
Ms. Maibam Babina, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv.
Uttarakhand HC Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, Adv.
State of T.N. Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR
Mr. Raja Rajeshwaran, Adv.
U.T. of Chandigarh Mr. Ankit Goel, AOR
State of A.P. Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR
Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Mathur, Adv.
BPSC &
Sikkim High Court Mr. Vishnu Sharma, AOR.
Ms. Anupama Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Rangoli Seth, Adv.
State of Meghalaya Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Gen., Meghalaya
Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR
State of Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Kharlyngdoh, Adv.
State of Nagaland Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
7
U.T. of Andaman &
Nicobar Admn. Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv.
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
State of Haryana Mr. Alok Sangwan, AAG
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Guhati High Court Mr. P.I. Jose, AOR
Ms. P.S. Chandralekha, Adv.
State of Punjab Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR
Mr. Siddant Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Navkiran Bolay, Adv.
State of Arunachal Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR
Pradesh Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Satyendra Kumar Srivastav, Adv.
State of Telangana Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Mritunjai Singh, Adv.
State of Rajastahan Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Raj, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR
State of Arunachal
Pradesh Mr. A. Tewari, Adv.
Ms. Eliza bar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, AOR.
Mr. Riju Mani Talukdar, Adv.
Govt. of Puducherry Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. V.G. Pragasam, AOR.
Mr. S.Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. S. Manuraj, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Vignesh, Adv.
State of Bihar Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. D.S. Parmar, Adv.
Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, Adv.
Rajasthan High Court Mr. Sunil K. Jain, AOR
Mr. Punya Garg, Adv.
Ms. Anusha Agarwal, Adv.
8
State of Chhatisgarh Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
HC of Bombay Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
Allahabad High Court Mr. Ashok K. Srivastava, AOR
State of Mizoram Mr. Pragyan Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Mudit Makhijani, Adv.
Mr. Shikhar Garg, Adv.
Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, AOR
Mr. Ejaz Maqbool, AOR
Mr. Debasis Misra, AOR
Mr. Lakshmi Raman Singh, AOR
Mr. Y. Raja Gopala Rao, AOR
Mr. Ugra Shankar Prasad, AOR
Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, AOR
Mr. T.V. Ratnam, AOR
Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR
Mr. Suvendu Suvasis Dash, AOR
State of MP Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR
with
Mr. Satendra singh, P.S.,Law
Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, AOR
Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, AOR
Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR
Mr. Siddhartha Chowdhury, AOR
Mr. Shail Kumar Dwivedi, AOR
Ms. Sarla Chandra, AOR
Ms. S. Janani, AOR
9
Mr. S.C. Patel, AOR
Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh, AOR
Mr. Rajesh Srivastava, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mr. R. Sathish, AOR
Mr. R. Nedumaran, AOR
Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh, AOR
Ms. Purnima Jauhari, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR
Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR
Mr. Naresh Kumar, AOR
Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, AOR
Ms. Naresh Bakshi, AOR
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR
Mr. M.R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Krishnayan Sen, AOR
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Mr. Shree Pal Singh, AOR
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Ms. Manisha Ambwani,AOR
Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR
HC of M.P. Mr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR
Mr. Naveen Kumar Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv
State of Mah. Ms. Deepa M. Kulkarni, Adv.
Mr. Nishant Ramaantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR
10
State of Odisha Mr. Som Raj Choudhury, AOR
Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Rohit K. Singh, AOR
Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, AOR
Mr. Arun K. Sinha, AOR
Mr. K. K. Mohan, AOR
Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR
Mr. R. Sathish, AOR
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR
Ms. A. Subhashini, AOR
Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee, AOR
Mr. B. S. Banthia, AOR
Mr. Ajay Pal, AOR
Ms. Asha Jain Madan, AOR
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Kamini Jaiswal, AOR
for M/S. Corporate Law Group, AOR
Mr. S. C. Patel, AOR
Mrs. D. Bharathi Reddy, AOR
Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR
Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR
Mr. B. Balaji, AOR
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR
Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, AOR
11
Telangana HC Ms. Anitha Shenoy, AOR
Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR
Mr. Ashwani Kumar, AOR
Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, AOR
Ms. Manju Jetley, AOR
Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR
Mr. Naveen R. Nath, AOR
Mr. Ashok Arora, Adv.
Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, AOR
Mr. Anandan, Adv.
Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, AOR
Mr. Shakti Singh, Adv.
Ms. Kanika Saran, Adv.
Intervenor(s) Mr. Gaichangpou Gangmei, AOR
Mr. Abhishek R. Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Kahorngam Zimik, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, AOR
RG, Madras HC Mr. Anandh Kannan N., AOR
Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR
Mr. Vyom Raghuvanshi, Adv.
Mr. Shikhar Kacker, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Re: State of Madhya Pradesh (High Court of Madhya Pradesh):
Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh and High Court of Madhya Pradesh:12
A. On behalf of State of Madhya Pradesh
(i) Shri Satyendra Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Department of Law and Legislative Affairs.
(ii) Shri R.C.S. Bisen, Additional Secretary, Law Department
(iii) Shri Vijay Singh Verma, Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, P.W.D.
(iv) Renu Pant, Secretary, M.P. P.S.C. B. On behalf of High Court of Madhya Pradesh
(i) Shri Arvind Shukla, Registrar General
(ii) Shri Shyam Bihari Verma, Registrar, Inspection and Litigation
(iii) Shri Sanat Kumar Kashyap, Registrar, Work and Infrastructure Vacancies:
The affidavits filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh through the Principal Secretary, Government of Madhya Pradesh and the High Court of Madhya Pradesh through the Registrar General of the High Court respectively have been placed on record.
Shri Vijay Hansaria, learned Amicus Curiae has submitted/compiled a short note highlighting the 13 position with regard to vacancies, infrastructure, residential accommodation and supporting staff. We have perused the same. It appears that, as on date, all the posts of ‘District Judge’ cadre except 22 posts which are earmarked as a ‘direct recruit’ quota have not been filled up as in the qualifying examination only 6 (six) candidates had qualified and have been subsequently selected.
In these circumstances, we direct that appointment of 6 (six) selected candidates be made within a month and the remaining vacancies against the ‘direct recruit’ quota be filled up and that the fresh selection process, which is stated to have been already initiated, for 22 unfilled vacancies and anticipated vacancies be concluded within the outer limit spelt out in the directions issued by this Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) & Anr. vs. U.P. Public Service Commission & ors.1.
Insofar as the posts of Civil Judge Senior Division are concerned, the vacancies, as on date, are only 5 (five). The same be filled up by promotion.
1. (2008) 17 SCC 703 14 So far as the cadre of Civil Judge Junior Division is concerned, out of 328 vacancies a recruitment process for 140 posts had been initiated on 1st August, 2018 and on 12th January, 2019 the selection has been completed and 113 candidates have been found qualified. The appointments of the said qualified candidates be made forthwith and, in any case, within a period of two months from today. The remaining vacancies including the anticipated vacancies, if any, have already been advertised. The process be completed within an outer limit as spelt out in the directions of this court in Malik Mazhar (3) (supra).
Infrastructure:
So far as the court rooms are concerned, the picture that emanates from the note/chart prepared by the learned Amicus Curiae, on the basis of the affidavits filed/instructions received, is that the existing number of court halls available, as on date, i.e. 1439 adequately takes care of the working strength of the judiciary in the State as on date.
The affidavits filed also indicate that 237 court rooms are presently under construction and are expected to be completed within a year or so. We 15 direct that the process of completion of construction of the said 237 court rooms be completed within an outer limit of one year from today.
The construction of the court rooms which are at the tender stage (i.e. 235) and at the proposal stage (i.e. 135) also be expedited so that the State judiciary as and when it functions in full strength does not face any difficulties in availability of the court rooms.
So far as the residential accommodation is concerned, from the note/chart prepared by the learned Amicus Curiae it appears that at present 254 quarters are under construction and 50 and 8 are at the tender and proposal stage. The said constructions be completed at the earliest.
The note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae further suggests that over and above the available quarters i.e. 1054 and those under construction and at the tender and proposal stage there is a further requirement of 655 quarters/residential accommodation.
While there is 100% reimbursement of rent, the learned Judges stay in rented house/houses which is not 16 a very healthy situation conducing to judicial work. We, therefore, direct the State of Madhya Pradesh to take up the matter in conjunction with the High Court and process and finalize necessary plans, proposals, etc. to enable all Judicial Officers to be provided with appropriate accommodation so as to enable them to effectively discharge their judicial duties.
So far as the supporting staff is concerned, the note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae would suggest that no directions in this regard would be required at this stage.
The learned Amicus Curiae has also drawn the attention of the Court that in terms of the letter of the Central Government dated 15th December, 2015 the funding of Centre and State for infrastructure in subordinate judiciary is required to be in the ratio of 60:40. The note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae also indicates that in the last three years i.e. from 2015-16 to 2017-18 while the State has contributed a sum of Rs.227.38 crore for infrastructure developent the contribution from the Centre is Rs.100.05 crore.
Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, who is present in Court, is requested by the Court to 17 look into the matter to ensure that the requisite funds from the Centre in the proportion/ratio as spelt out in the Central Government’s letter dated 15th December, 2015 are made available including the arrears amounts to enable the order of this Court to be implemented in letter and spirit.
We permit the learned Amicus Curiae to make a mention of the matter with regard to the State of Madhya Pradesh (High Court of Madhya Pradesh) as and when necessity arises.
Re: State of Tamil Nadu (High Court of Madras) Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu and High Court of Madras:
A. On behalf of State of Tamil Nadu (i) Mr. S.S. Poovalingam, Secretary, Law Department (ii) Mr. K. Nandakumar, IAS, Secretary, TNPSC (iii) Mrs. T. Vaidegi, Deputy Secretary,Home Department (iv) Mr. R. Sridhar, Under Secretary, Home Department B. On behalf of High Court of Madras (i) Shri C. Kumarappan, Registrar General
The affidavits have been filed on behalf of the High Court of Madras as well as of the State of Tamil Nadu.18
The core of the affidavits has been condensed by the learned Amicus Curiae in a note/chart which we have perused.
In so far as the cadre of District Judge is concerned, the number of vacancies, as on date, is stated to be 95 out of which 54 are to be filled by Regular Promotion; 11 by Limited Competitive Examination; and 31 by Direct Recruitment.
In the affidavit(s) filed, it has been stated that while the exercise of filling up 54 posts in the cadre of District Judge by regular promotion is concerned has been completed, the further action in the matter will be taken once the process of Limited Competitive Examination is over which is likely to be done by the end of January, 2019.
We direct the High Court of Madras and the State of Tamil Nadu to fill up the aforesaid vacant posts i.e. 54 + 11 latest by the end of March 2019.
Insofar as 31 posts earmarked for the direct recruitment is concerned, it has been stated that the said vacancies have been notified on 13th January, 2019 and the process of selection and appointment is likely to be completed by the end of August, 2019. 19
So far as the posts to be filled up by direct recruitment is concerned, the State and the High Court, undoubtedly, will follow the time schedule laid down by this Court in Malik Mazhar (3) (supra) and complete the same by actual appointment of eligible candidates.
Insofar as the cadre of Civil Judge Senior Division is concerned, there are 56 existing vacancies and 64 anticipated vacancies in the said cadre i.e. a total of 120. On 7th August, 2018, 106 vacancies were notified and it is stated that the said process is likely to be completed by the end of January, 2019.
Taking note of the aforesaid statement made in the affidavit(s) filed, we direct completion of the process and appointment to the cadre of Civil Judge Senior Division by promotion by the end of February, 2019.
Insofar as the cadre of Civil Judge Junior Division is concerned, it appears that as against 232 vacancies at that point of time 320 vacancies were notified on 9th April, 2018. The additional vacancies, it is stated, arose in anticipation of the creation of additional posts which have since been created (80 in number).20
From the note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae it appears that as against 320 notified posts 209 appointments have been made.
So far as the court rooms and residential accommodation are concerned, there is a further requirement over and above what is presently available including the premises taken on rent for accommodation of the Judicial Officers. The details in this regard are spelt out in the note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae.
Having considered the matter we direct that the requisite steps in this regard be taken. In this regard, specifically, we take note of the submissions made on behalf of the State Government that for construction of additional court rooms the State is committed to sanction Rs. 414 crores and for residential accommodation a total of Rs. 231 crore in the next five years. The State of Tamil Nadu, therefore, is directed to act accordingly.
Insofar as support staff is concerned, the note/chart of the learned Amicus Curiae projects an actual requirement, as on date, of over 6000 additional 21 hands. Out of the said requirement, the recruitment of 2962 support staff is under the purview of the Public Service Commission and, on instructions of the Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, the learned Amicus Curiae states that 2100 candidates will be recommended for appointment in the next two months. We direct the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission to act accordingly and the Government of Tamil Nadu to take necessary follow up action.
Insofar as the vacancies numbering in 3534 which are required to be filled up by the District Judges of the State are concerned, there appears to be some lethargy and inaction.
While it is not necessary for us to go into the reasons for the same, we request the High Court to issue necessary directions to the District Judges to expedite the process of recruitment and complete the same as expeditiously as possible and, in any case, within six months from today.
We are told by the Registrar General of the High Court that there is a Monitoring Committee of the Hon’ble Judges of the High Court which is looking into the matter. We request the said Committee to 22 continuously monitor the process of appointment of support staff by the District Judges of the State.
For the present, no further order would be called for insofar the support staff is concerned.
The learned Amicus Curiae will be at liberty to make a mention of the matter, if so required, at any point of time.
Re : UT of Puducherry Following officers are present on behalf of the UT of Puducherry :
(i) Ms. J. Juliet Pushpa, Law Secretary
(ii) Mr. Devesh Singh, Secretary, PWD The compilation/note/chart with regard to different aspects of the case as made by the learned Amicus Curiae insofar as Union Territory of Puducherry is concerned leads us to be satisfied that no immediate order is required.
Re: State of Bihar Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Bihar and the High Court of Patna:
A. On behalf of State of Bihar (i) Shri A.K. Jain, Law Secretary, (ii) Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain, Secretary cum
Legal Remebrancer Law, State of Bihar, Patna 23
(ii) Shri Amit Kumar, Joint Secretary, PWD
(iii) Shri Jai Singh, Special Secretary/MD Revenue Department
(iv) Shri Gurfan, Deputy Secretary, GAD, Bihar
(v) Shri Keshav Ranjan Prasad, Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission B. On behalf of High Court of Patna
(i) Shri Bidhu Bhusan Pathak, Registrar General
(ii) Shri Arjun Kumar Jha, Registrar We have perused the chart/note prepared by the learned Amicus Curiae on the basis of the affidavits filed and also the information conveyed to the learned Amicus Curiae in the course of the meeting that he held with the aforesaid officers.
So far as the cadre of District Judge is concerned, the note of the learned Amicus Curiae would go to show that 94 appointments have been made by promotion in December, 2018 and a fresh process for filling up of 91 vacancies against the promotional quota will be initiated shortly. We direct all concerned to initiate the said process at the earliest. 24
Insofar as the quota earmarked to be filled up by limited competitive examination is concerned, as against 53 vacancies, 26 vacancies were notified on 16th January, 2018 and process for filling up the said posts is presently on and likely to be completed. We direct the same to be completed on or before 28th February, 2019. Another 27 vacancies are required to be filled up against the aforesaid quota. We direct that the proposal for filling up the said vacancies be taken up at the earliest.
Insofar as 13 posts required to be filled up by direct recruitment is concerned, the note of the learned Amicus Curiae would show that the said posts have been advertised on 14th/15th January, 2019 and a statement has been made on behalf of the High Court that the process would be completed by the end of June, 2019. We direct the completion of the said process within the aforesaid time schedule.
Insofar as the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) is concerned, it is stated that 273 vacancies (125 existing and 148 anticipated) are required to be filled up and eligible number of persons to fill up the said posts by promotion would be about 155. We direct 25 that the process of promotion to be initiated immediately and to be completed on or before 31st May, 2019. The High Court, if the need arises, may also consider granting adhoc promotion to Civil Judges (Junior Division) to man the vacancies in the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) by appropriate relaxation of the period of qualifying service in deserving cases.
Insofar as the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division) is concerned, we are told that the process initiated in August, 2018 for 349 vacancies is likely to be completed by June, 2019 and further that a fresh process for 182 vacancies would be initiated shortly. We, therefore, direct the said exercise to be done on priority basis.
So far as the court rooms are concerned, the note of the learned Amicus Curiae would go to show that against the working strength of 1208, availability of court rooms is to the tune of 1355. Further more, 270 court rooms are under construction and in the note of the learned Amicus Curiae, it has been pointed out that 202 of the said 270 court rooms are likely to be completed within six months and remaining 68 in about two years. We direct the aforesaid work to be completed in terms of the statement made.
26
So far as the residential accommodation is concerned, there appears to be shortfall to the extent of 573. The State of Bihar has undertaken before the Court that of the 295 units under construction, 63 would be completed within six months, 80 within one year and 152 within two years. We direct the concerned department i.e. P.W.D. in the State of Bihar to adhere to the time schedule and ensure completion of the constructions in terms of the above time frame.
Insofar as the rent of the residential accommodation is concerned, it is stated in the note of the learned Amicus Curiae that instead of full reimbursement of rent in the State of Bihar, 20% of the basic pay is reimbursed by way of rent allowance so far as the officers in Patna are concerned and for rest of the State, it is 10% of the basic pay. Keeping in mind the market conditions and the basic pay, a fixed percentage like 20% and 10% thereof of the basic pay may not match the rent that a judicial officer is required to pay. The State of Bihar will consider within a period of four weeks as to whether full reimbursement of actual rent paid by a judicial officer should be reimbursed to him as is the prevailing practice in several other States.
27
Insofar as support staff is concerned, the figures presented before us in the note appears to be somewhat inconsistent. Be that as it may, it appears that while the process for filling up over a thousand posts of stenographers is presently under process, the High Court has submitted a proposal to the State Government for creation of 3773 Class III posts and 1877 Class IV posts, which according to the High Court is required to effectively man the courts at the district and subordinate level including such courts which will be set up in future. The State of Bihar to look into the matter and ensure the sanction of additional posts as required, even if it be in phases or by instalments.
The issue with regard to the additional posts to be sanctioned by the State Government shall be highlighted in the status report of the State Government and the High Court to be filed within two months from today.
Re: State of Punjab Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Punjab and the High Court of Punjab & Haryana: 28
A. On behalf of State of Punjab (i) Shri Kumar Rahul, Secretary, Department of Home Affairs and Justice (ii) Shri Charanjit Khanna, Superintendent, Department of Home Affairs and Justice (Judicial-I Branch) B. On behalf of High Court of Punjab & Haryana (i) Shri Harnam Singh Thakur, Registrar General
(ii) Shri Sanjay Sachdeva, OSD Litigation Vacancies:
So far as the vacancies in the cadre of District Judge are concerned, we direct that the vacancies in the said cadre by limited competitive examination or direct recruitment be filled up at the earliest and the process which is stated to be at different stages be brought to its conclusion latest by 28th February, 2019.
So far as the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division) is concerned, the selected candidates as against the vacancies notified in the year 2016 be appointed forthwith after completion of all formalities. The 75 vacancies assessed by the High Court as on today be advertised immediately and the process be completed as per the time schedule in Malik Mazhar (3) (supra).29
So far as the court rooms are concerned, we direct that the court rooms under construction be completed at the earliest.
So far as the residential accommodation is concerned, we direct the State of Punjab to submit the concrete plan by which it proposes to meet the housing requirements of the judicial officers of the State. No specific order would be called for with regard to the support staff.
Re: State of Haryana Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Haryana and the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh:-
A. On behalf of the State of Haryana (i) Mr. Alok Nigam, Additional Chief Secretary
to Government of Haryana, PWD (H&R) Department.
(ii) Mr. Nitin Kumar Yadav, Secretary to Government of Haryana, Personnel Department.
(iii) Mr. Rajiv Rattan, Special Secretary to Government of Haryana, Home-II Department.
(iv) Dr. Shaleen, Additional Secretary to Government of Haryana, Finance Department. 30
(v) Mr. Nishant Kumar Yadav, Secretary, HPSC.
(vi) Mrs. Matreyi Gupta, Chief Architect.
(vii) Mr. Rakesh Manocha, E.I.C., PWD (B&B) B. On behalf of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh
(i) Mr. Harnam Singh Thakur, Registrar General, High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh.
The vacancies in the cadre of District Judge required to be filled up by the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (L.D.C.E.) and by direct recruitment are stated to be at different stages of completion and the date of likely completion has been mentioned as 28.2.2019. Both processes may be completed on or before the said date i.e. 28.2.2019.
As far as the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division) is concerned, the process of filling up 109 vacancies is presently underway and the date for completion thereof is stated to be 30.4.2019. The said process be completed on or before the said date i.e. 30.4.2019.
So far as the Court rooms and residential accommodation are concerned, the construction which is underway be completed within the time schedule as 31 mentioned in the affidavit of the Registrar General of the High Court, which recites the decisions taken in a joint meeting with the State Government and also in the meeting that the learned Amicus Curiae has had with the Registrar General of the High Court and the officers of the State.
So far as the support staff is concerned, the position does not appear to be very cute. However, we take note of the fact that on 7.1.2019, 352 posts were advertised. The said process be completed at the earliest.
Re: Union Territory of Chandigarh Following officers are present on behalf of the Union Territory of Chandigarh:-
(i) Mr. Bhartendu Shandilya, Dy. Resident Commissioner, U.T. of Chandigarh.
(ii) Mr. Yashpal Gupta, Superintending Engineer, Capital Project, U.T. of Chandigarh.
Having looked at the note prepared by the learned Amicus Curiae, no orders would be called for in the case of the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
Re: State of Odisha Following officers are present on behalf of the State of Odisha and the High Court of Orissa:- 32
A.On behalf of the State of Odisha
(i) Mr. Subhakanta Mishra, Special Secretary (Home)
(ii) Mr. Sashikant Mishra, Principal Secretary (Law).
(iii) Mr. K.C. Mallik, Special Secretary (O.P.S.C.) B.On behalf of the High Court of Orissa
(i) Mr. R.K. Patnaik, Registrar General, High Court of Orissa.
The vacancies in the cadre of District Judge against the quota earmarked for being filled up by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (L.D.C.E.) and direct recruitment (12 and 6 respectively) which were stated to be underway be completed within the time schedule indicated in the affidavits filed i.e. by 15.3.2019.
Insofar as the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) is concerned, as on 24.12.2018, promotions to the cadre of District Judge had been made and further promotions by way of L.D.C.E. are likely to be made in the immediate future. We direct that the consequential vacancies for the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) be filled up by initiating the requisite process at the earliest.
33
The process of appointment by direct recruitment against the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division), which is underway be completed on or before the end of June, 2019, which is the time line indicated in the affidavit filed.
So far as the Court halls/Court rooms are concerned, 211 Court rooms which are stated to be under construction, 94 of them are likely to be completed in six months and 82 in one year. We direct that the said Court halls be made ready within the time schedule. The steps also be taken for making available the additional number of Court rooms required which is stated to be 272. The details regarding initiation of the process for constructing the additional Court rooms (272) and the progress in the said regard be placed before the Court by means of a status report of the competent authority of the State of Odisha within three months from today.
So far as the residential accommodation is concerned, the deficit seems to be in the region of
361. It is further stated that 192 units are under construction, all of which will be completed within one 34 year. The time schedule mentioned above be adhered to and compliance report of the progress made be filed alongwith the status report with regard to the Court rooms. The case of the State of Odisha will be considered after three months.
Insofar as the rent for the residential accommodation is concerned, it is stated in the note of the learned Amicus Curiae that instead of full reimbursement of rent in the State of Odisha, 20% of the basic pay is reimbursed by way of rent allowance so far as the officers in Bhubaneswar are concerned and for rest of the State, it is 10% of the basic pay. Keeping in mind the market conditions and the basic pay, a fixed percentage like 20% and 10% thereof of the basic pay may not match the rent that a judicial officer is required to pay. The State of Odisha will consider within a period of four weeks as to whether full reimbursement of actual rent paid by a judicial officer should be reimbursed to him as is the prevailing practice in several other States.
Re: States of Kerala and Karnataka On a mention by Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel, the issues with regard to the States of Kerala and Karnataka will be considered on 22.1.2019. 35
Re: State of West Bengal The status report filed on behalf of the State of West Bengal pursuant to the order dated 6.12.2018 has been placed before us by Shri Shyam Divan, learned Amicus Curiae. A copy of the same has also been furnished to the learned Counsel for the High Court of Calcutta. The time schedule for completion of different works concerning infrastructure, manpower etc. be completed and the Registrar General of the High Court shall be at liberty to interact with the authorities of the State with regard to the progress of the different items of work required to be completed. I.A. No. 8198/2019 in Civil Appeal No. 1867/2006 (for intervention) We are not inclined to entertain this application. But we leave it open to the applicant to file a separate writ petition or take out any other such proceedings as he may think fit. I.A. is accordingly disposed of.
In the next group the vacancy position, infrastructure availability and the position with regard to the man-power will be undertaken in respect of States of Rajasthan (High Court of Rajasthan), 36 Sikkim (High Court of Sikkim), Telangana (High Court of Telangana), Andhra Pradesh (High Court of Andhra Pradesh), Tripura (High Court of Tripura) and Uttarakhand (High Court of Uttarakhand). The High Courts functioning in the aforesaid States are directed to file their report/counter/response within two weeks from today with a copy to Shri Gaurav Agrawal, learned Amicus Curiae.
The matter in respect of States of Rajasthan (High Court of Rajasthan), Sikkim (High Court of Sikkim), Telangana (High Court of Telangana), Andhra Pradesh (High Court of Andhra Pradesh), Tripura (High Court of Tripura) and Uttarakhand (High Court of Uttarakhand) will be taken up on 19th February, 2019.
The Registrars General of the aforesaid High Courts i.e. High Courts of Rajasthan, Sikkim, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Tripura and Uttarakhand will be present in Court in person to assist this Court. Needless to say the Registrars General are expected to be fully acquainted with all aspects of the on-going selections, vacancies, infrastructure, etc. so as to be able to answer all such queries that may be put to them by the Court.
37
We also direct the Chief Secretaries of the aforesaid States concerned i.e. States of Rajasthan, Sikkim, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Tripura and Uttarakhand whose cases are being considered on 19th February, 2019 to depute a suitable officer(s) who is/are conversant with all details of the issue(s) involved and competent to take decision(s) in the matter in Court, if necessary.
For such of the States where the recruitment is undertaken by the State Public Service Commissions, the Secretary of the State Public Service Commissions shall also be associated in the interaction between the Registrars General and the Authorized Officer(s) of the States and the Secretaries of such State Public Service Commissions will also be present in Court on the next date fixed.
The Registrars General of the High Courts, the Secretaries of the State Public Service Commissions and the Officer(s) to be authorized by the Chief Secretaries of the States concerned will interact between themselves at their respective places of 38 posting to ensure prompt and timely appointments against the vacant posts and to draw up a plan/scheme to fill up the deficiency/deficiencies in infrastructure and manpower which would be presented to the Court on the next date fixed. The Registrars General of the concerned High Courts, the Secretaries of the State Public Service Commissions as well as the Authorized Officer(s) of the States concerned will thereafter interact with Shri Gaurav Agrawal, learned Amicus Curiae so as to enable the learned Amicus Curiae to present the result/position before the Court in as precise a manner as possible.
[VINOD LAKHINA] [ANAND PRAKASH]
AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER