Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

BISHAMBER SINGH, AN ADVOCATE, WHO WAS ENTITLED TO APPLY FOR A POST IN THE HIGHER JUDICIAL SERVICE, TO BE FILLED UP BY DIRECT RECRUITMENT FILED A PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 WHICH WAS REGISTERED AS WRIT PETITION NO. 394 OF 1994, ASSAILING THE POWER AND AUTHORITY OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DIRECT RECRUITS, THE DECISION OF THE FULL COURT OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT DATED 25.7.1992, RECOMMENDING THE NAMES OF THOSE SELECTED AS WELL AS THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT DATED 13.4.1994, APPOINTING 24 DIRECT RECRUITS IN THE CADRE OF HIGHER JUDICIAL SERVICE. THE ESSENTIAL GROUND OF CHALLENGE WAS THAT THE ADVERTISEMENT HAVING BEEN ISSUED ONLY FOR 5 VACANCIES, AND RECRUITMENT PROCESS HAVING ALREADY STARTED FOR FILLING UP THOSE ADVERTISED VACANCIES, IT WAS NOT OPEN FOR THE SELECTION COMMITTEE TO ENTER INTO A PROCESS OF CALCULATION AND ENHANCE THE NUMBER OF PERSONS TO BE RECRUITED BY DIRECT RECRUITMENT AND THE FULL COURT WAS NOT ENTITLED TO APPROVE THE SAME. IT IS CONTENDED THAT SUCH PROCEDURE DEBARRED MANY ASPIRANTS LIKE THE PETITIONER, FROM AVAILING OF THEIR CHANCES OF BEING APPOINTED TO ANY OF THOSE POSTS MEANT FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT. IT WAS PRAYED IN THE AFORESAID WRIT PETITION THAT THE APPOINTMENTS MADE OF RESPONDENTS NOS. 3 TO 26, WHICH WERE IN EXCESS OF 5 ADVERTISED VACANCIES SHOULD BE QUASHED AND THE HIGH COURT SHOULD BE COMMANDED TO ISSUE A FRESH ADVERTISEMENT IN RESPECT OF THE INCREASED VACANCIES IN THE QUOTA OF DIRECT RECRUITMENT. ANOTHER ADVOCATE, MS. SUMAN GUPTA, ALSO FILED A SIMILAR PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32, WHICH WAS REGISTERED AS WRIT PETITION NO. 592 OF 1994 FOR SIMILAR RELIEF AS PRAYED FOR IN WRIT PETITION NO. 394 OF 1994. THE AFORESAID 3 CASES, THEREFORE, RELATE TO THE RECRUITMENT MEANT FOR THE YEAR 1988.