Karnataka High Court
Smt C V Chitra vs The State Of Karnataka By Its Principal ... on 16 June, 2008
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
IN THE HIGH OOURT OF KARHATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED T1118 THE 1675 DAY OF JUNE,
PRESENT
ma Honrnm mznmmc Joan:-H, * . 4%
mm Honrnm 5n;g.P'4r:{11--._ . T 1:'
WRIT rumor: uo.73sg a%_:§';g3§2_9_;§x_§_:j?:V %' _
BETWEEN:
1.
Smt.C.V.C.hitra, '_ . . . ~ V Wife ofPrasad Rao M.L;, "
Working as,€'1S*3iStar1t Cou_rt_Offi::g:r - ' Barxgalqrck .
Wife of J Aged aI39u"i:.3S yea_tfs,*..\ Wox'king as Assistant Court Ofiocr
- 560 001. -
A '-Son of Rama Rao, 34 years, 'waiting a Assistant Omccr at" the High Court of Kamaiaka. V' ~ : ._Ban'gaIm-e - 560 001. Q S§nLP.Mama1ha, Wife P.Vc:nkatcsh Aithal, Aged about 35 years, Working as Assistant Court Oficcr at the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore --~ 560 O0 1. . Smt.R.Ushadevi, . Smt.G. --
Wife of N ataraj, Aged about 35 years, Working as Assistant Court Ofi3.r;éf « . at the High Court of Bangalore --- 560 001. . Srichandralcanth Vaman A Son of Gokha1c.V.G., Agcd about 45 years,__ Working as Assistant ' at the High Court of } Banga1ore----560 001. '~ 1 Wife of 1* t Aged about 35 Working as F5I'a"'§_tV at thcrfigh of Bangalore 4 '56Q__UQ1.' é ' " - _ . Sxi.B.fcGirish, A' * "
Son of R'am.azah.B, Aged. about 3.0 years,' Waxking as Qijvision Assistant at..t11e5.--.Hig'i1.éCoux't of Karnataka, it jaangagloxegsso om.
V.-fife of.Vas;1i1thak11mar.G, Aged about 32 years, Working as Second Division Assistant = natthc High Court of Karnataka, Bafigaiom - 560 001.
_o'1""#1o.3ri.sadax Ali, t , " "Son of late Abdul Khadar Sab, Aged about 33 years, Working as Typist at the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore - 560 001.
1 I .Smt.S.Gayath1i, Wife: of S.V.Ran1agopa1, Aged about 35 years, Working as Typist at the V High Court ofKamataka, ' Bangaiore --- 550 001. V' T rnuifitbfimnsy' (By Sri. P.S.Rajagc~.pa1, Sr;"'A§i$r. 'Vf('3xt.P~ 1.' A2' 85 16, Petition against to-- 9 11~--.i_s.VVdi.m_ni$sed) AND:
1. The State ' By its ' Law DepartIz1cnt;VA;Vidhana.'S~0§;C1h£i, 1'.
2. The Ba.1'1ga1o1e-2- 560 'OO'1,,' .
Rep. by its Registzfézr Cfinerai ~.'{'hev-'.1_§'ec,:=11i"mA1ent for 7 A Se1£:ctioz*:1f0.4ti1.e post of Civil Judges {Jt113ior:f)_ivir§ie1;i), represented by the F'~<'=€istf8i'*€3e_ncral, . High Court 'Karnataka, . Bangaiorc «#4 560 001. REBPONDENTS
4. '(By"SA£i,_B.Sfinivasa Gowda, Govt. Adv. for 1924.. 'Sfi.xNaganand, Sr. Adv. for M/sfiundarswamy Ramdas 8:. Advs. for R»? 65 R~3) amend their rules so as to enable a law graduate who may not have even put in three years of practice to be eligible "compete and enter the judicial service. In this context, was made to the effect that fmsh service should be imparted tram" 11' vvone The zelevant observations made byilfhe paragraph 32 of the he1e1mdcr".~ _' . E "32. In association case (SOC at p.314)-- fshis in order to enter must be an at standing. Rules were an1endeéi\':'Vaccoi'<l.i:n'g1y. '' With the passage of time, Aezgpeticncel that the best talent which is V_ _v is not Vailfracted to the judicial sexvice. A Graduate after three years of V finds the judicial service not attractive * It has been recommended by 'the Shetty Congfisiission after taking into consideration the views Qarptessed before it by various authorities that the z foran applicant to have been an advocate for at least 3 years should be done away with. After taking all the cixcumstances into consideration, We accept @111/is; recommendation of the Shetty Commission and the argument of the learned amicus curiae that it should be no longer mandatory for an applicant desirous of entering the judicial service to an advocate of at least three years standirag.' -V accordingly, in the light of the . the Judgment in All India Judges the' b High Courts and to the StatetAG'm.'exf1ime.:1te "to_ their Rules so as to enable may not even have put -in thiiee 'jre.arse.'oi'fVprau¢ti(:%e to > be eligible to compete eater Service. We, however, mcommenci 's-.4. into the Judicial Se-xviee he training of not less than one yea:V;$refehe.e.b:1y *-:w§'j%¢;;e's."
06. oftlie' Court, the Karnataka Rules, 2004 were framed and were eotfificafion published in the Karnataka dgaaegx o9';e91_2oo5. The said rules came into force with of their publication in the Ofiieial Gazette. Io ..t1§£esReen1itment Rules, 2004, in the table given
--V to the post of Civil Jurige (Jr.Dn.), under u x V '4t"V.'e.theVheadVV*Qua]ifications', it 'm provided as under:
07.
(1) Must be holder of a degree in law by a Univemity estabiished by law in India "irtave been emoflcd as an advocate; (2) Must not have completec1.asVo_11 5' receipt of applications 38:yea1fi-aof *theVegtst1;_of a candidate be1ottgittg_tt_t schettttted C!it?Xi;E:'At3'r'SCI7it§(l1:'|V3tCe:} Tribe and 35 yeaxs of t1ie»_case:o5f As already referred to avbotie, it of enrollment as an advocate as by Rules, 2004 that is under' pgosegtit petition.
the petifioners Sri.P.S.Rajo'goptfl 'ng contentions:-
(i) The ';3t1bIict£ttio;:t of rules as per Annexure-'B' on §ifasVVA'1:ot in ttttt H 'Idanoe with Section 3(2)(a) mad with Sct)'tioVn_eE§VOf State Civil Services Act, 1973.
(551 Ae4".Se:cx1sioz1 28 of the Karnataka General Clauses Act, it. the authority having power to make the rules a ttzttiétt "sfitall, before making them, publish a tttatt of the T rules for the information of persons likely to be gr VS.RAL.l!UKU1ESA.H'A1WO2'flRS,IepoI'tedin€2:0O0)4 SCC 64-0. He has contended that the impugned in exercise of powers conferred under T' 'thev' Constitution of India, which is held "to"'be._ a,,ec;1;5;§1¢;¢. I itself in so far as the Iecmitment cadre are concerned and said by Article 309 of the 'of,..2Indi,:.§'--v..,, fie has also contended that the mlee' Governor under Article 234 of to any Act made by the Clauses Act, 1899, refers the zequirexnent of "t The expression'enactment' is defined of the Kaxnataka Generai Clauses _ Act, doeswnowti i:o.ak:-e reference to the Constitution. He also the General Ciauses Act, 1397 Section 23 r'cfenencevw"to 'Central Act' or 'Regulation'. The terms ' _ 'Central z§ct'~.'eind 'Regulation' are defined under Section 3(7) 35 respectively, which also do not make any zeference to the _ «Conefimfion. He therefore contends that in the absence of any xetilfimment of publication under Article 234 of the Constitution % results are available in a sealed cover, it is unnecessary the sealed cover and declare the results in View of of the writ petition.
gm 1: '
PKS « V
j