Chattisgarh High Court
Ku. Edvina Ekka vs High Court Of Chhattisgarh on 29 August, 2024
Author: Rajani Dubey
Bench: Rajani Dubey
1/7
2024:CGHC:33055
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 4339 of 2024
• Arvind Kumar S/o Shri Baburam, aged about 40 years, R/o Rajpur,
Near Bus Stop, 6- Ward, Raipur Durg, District- Durg (C.G.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. High Court of Chhattisgarh Through The Registrar General High Court
of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
2. Chhattisgarh State Bar Council Through Its Secretary State Bar
Council of Chhattisgarh Near High Court Premises Bilaspur District
Bilaspur, (C.G.).
3. Competent Authority Principal District And Session Judge Raipur
District Raipur (C.G.)
---Respondents
And WPC No. 4354 of 2024 • Ku. Edvina Ekka, D/o Shri Edward Ekka Baburam, aged about 39 years, R/o LIC of India, Raj Bhawan, Civil Lines Raipur District Raipur (C.G.)
--- Petitioner Versus 2/7
1. High Court of Chhattisgarh Through The Registrar General High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.).
2. Chhattisgarh State Bar Council Through Its Secretary State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Near High Court Premises Bilaspur District Bilaspur,(C.G.).
3. Competent Authority Principal District And Session Judge Raipur District Raipur (C.G.).
---Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Advocate. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate.
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 29.08.2024
1. Since in both these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India common questions are involved, they are being heard and decided by this common order.
2. By way of these petitions, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:-
"10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents No. 1 & 3 to issue experience certificate from the date of enrollment as an advocate in State Bar Council. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 to consider petitioners' experience certificate from the date of enrollment in State Bar Council which is issued by the respondent No. 3 and not to be reject his application for the District Judge Examination 2023 on the basis of petitioners' enrollment in District Bar.
10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other ancillary relief by issuing any other suitable writ, direction or order, deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of petition.
An affidavit is filed herewith in support of this petition."3/7
3. Facts, in brief, of the case, as projected in writ petitions are that the petitioners wanted to appear in the examination of District Judge (Entry Level) Examination 2023 and the last date and time for receipt of application in the Registry is 31.08.2024 time 5:00 pm, but respondents No. 1 & 3 are not providing experience certificate to the petitioners in view of the order dated 27.09.2017 passed by this Hon'ble High Court in the matter of Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPC No. 5383/2008), wherein it was held that Experience and seniority of an advocate is to be counted from the date of enrollment with the State Bar Council.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners Arvind Kumar in W.P.(C) No.4339/2024 is enrolled as an Advocate in State Bar Council from 24.06.2011, whereas another petitioner Ku. Edvina Ekka in W.P.(C) No.4354/2024 is enrolled as an Advocate in State Bar Council from 06.01.2013. As such, they have completed more than 07 years of practice, but respondents No. 1 & 3 are not providing experience certificates according to the date of their enrollment. So, direction may be issued to respondents No. 1 & 3 to issue experience certificate from the date of their enrollment as an Advocate in State Bar Council and not to reject the petitioners' application for the District Judge Examination in view of this Court's order passed in the matter of Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra). Thus, both these petitions may be allowed and suitable direction may be issued to the respondents.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1/High Court of Chhattisgarh, strongly opposes the prayer of the petitioners and submits that both the 4/7 petitioners have filed these petitions on apprehension and they did not file/submit applications for District Judge (Entry Level) Examination, 2023 before the respondent No.1, as such, no cause of action arises in favour of the petitioners and as per format of advertisement dated 05.08.2024, the petitioners have to file essential certificates. So, both the petitions are liable to be dismissed.
6. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Manish S. Pardasani v. Inspector State Excise reported in (2019) 2 SCC 660.
7. No notice was issued to respondents No. 2 & 3.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
9. It is held in advertisement dated 05.08.2024 mentioned in the sub clause (a) (iv) of Clause "Two -Eligibility" issued by respondent No. 1/High Court of Chhattisgarh, which is as under:-
" (a) No person shall be eligible for appointment by direct recruitment unless, he or she-
(i) XXXX
(ii) XXXX
(iii) XXXX "(iv) has for at least seven years been an advocate as on 01/01/2024 in other words, the applicant must be practicing as on 01/01/2024 as an Advocate and must have so practiced for a period of not less than seven year as on such date."
It is written in sub clause (c) of Clause "Three-Application form & testimonials" as under :-
(a) XXXX
(b) XXXX 5/7 "(c) The applicant shall furnish a certificate from the Secretary General of the Supreme Court of India/ Registrar General/ Registrar of the High Courts/ Principal District & Sessions Judge concerned, bearing legible seal with date, month & year of its issuance regarding his/her practice as an Advocate as per format annexed."
10. The petitioner Arvind Kumar in WPC No. 4339/2024 filed his Experience Certificate issued by the District Judge, Durg on 20.08.2024. For ready reference, the contents of experience certificate is reproduced herein as under:
"Experience Certificate (This certificate must accompany the application) No. 11/I-15-1/98, Dated- 20.08.2024 Certified that Shri Arvind Kumar S/o. Shri Baburam is enrolled with the Bar Council of Chhattisgarh having enrollment No.- 297/2011 Dated-24.06.2011.
He/she is practicing Advocate as on 22.11.2019 to till 01.01.2024 in this Court.
Place- Durg Date- 20.08.2024 Sd/-
Principal District & Sessions Judge Durg (C.G.)
11. The petitioner Ku. Edvina Ekka in WPC No. 4354/2024 filed her Experience Certificate issued by the District Judge, Raipur on
21.08.2024. For ready reference the contents of experience certificate is reproduced herein as under:-
6/7
Experience Certificate (This certificate must accompany the application) No. Q/I-14-01/88, Raipur, Dated- 21.08.2024 Certified that Edvina Ekka D/o. Shri Edward Ekka is enrolled with the Bar Council of Chhattisgarh having enrollment No.- CG-26/2013 Dated-06.01.2013.
She is practicing Advocate as on 08.08.2024 in this Court.
Place- Raipur (C.G.) Date- 21.08.2024 Sd/-
Principal District & Sessions Judge Raipur (C.G.)
12. It is clear from Annexure-P/6 in both the petitions that the experience certificates have been issued on the basis of information provided by District Bar Association, wherein enrollment date is clearly mentioned.
According to the petitioners, they did not file/submit application for the District Judge (Entry Level) Examination, 2023 before the respondent No. 1/High Court of Chhattisgarh and the last date of filing the applications according to the advertisement is 31.08.2024.
13. While dealing with the plea of bias, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Manish S. Pardasani (supra) in paragraphs 65 & 66 as under:-
"65. In our considered view, the High Court ought not to have issued direction of this nature. It was legally not permissible to do so. Indeed, the High Court by issuing such direction which are essentially passed in anticipation of the order being passed by an appellate authority, interfered with the judicial independence of an appellate authority in deciding the appeals in accordance with law.
66. It is the sole discretion of the appellate authority under the Act to decide the appeal based on the facts involved in the appeal, and legal provisions 7/7 which eventually result in passing the judicial order. No higher court can pass such orders merely on anticipation of an order being passed by an appellate authority. It is only after the order is passed, that the aggrieved person has the legal right to take recourse to a legal remedy available in law against such order by approaching to a higher forum and pray for grant of appropriate relief against such order."
14. It transpires from both the petitions that the petitioners have not yet filed/submitted their applications for the District Judge (Entry Level) Examination, 2023 before the respondent No. 1/High Court of Chhattisgarh, and the respondent No. 3 issued experience certificates as per its authority. In these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to direct the respondent No. 3 to issue experience certificates from the date of enrollment and the respondent No. 1/High Court of Chhattisgarh to not reject their applications for the District Judge (Entry Level) Examination, 2023.
15. In the result, both the petitions being devoid of merit and cause of action, are liable to be and are hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey) JUDGE Uttej