Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The learned Advocate General, who appeared on behalf of the State, submitted that the Public Service Commission had necessarily to be associated with the process of selection, especially in view of Article 234 of the Constitution of India and that even though there may be merit in the contention that the primacy in the matter of selection must be with the High Court, the submission that the Public Service Commission should be kept out, should not be accepted. Since the Court felt that it would be better to know what exactly was the reaction of the State to the situation arising out of these submissions, the matter was adjourned seeking the views of the Government. The Government thereafter considered the matter and a fresh affidavit dated 29.4.2002 was filed in OJC No. 6210 of 2001. The State, according to the affidavit, took the view that isolating the Public Service Commission, a constitutional body, from the process of selection completely, may not be in accord with Article 234 of the Constitution of India and the emerging situation can best be met if the High Court is assigned the dominant role in the process of the selection and the Public Service Commission attends to the procedural matters like inviting applications and having a minor representation in the selection body. The learned Advocate General submitted that if this Court thought it proper, while the Public Service Commission would invite applications and look after the holding of the examinations proper, matters relating to the setting of question papers, appointment of examiners and the like can be taken over by the High Court so as to ensure no deviation from the straight a narrow path at any of those stages, and that the Committee of three for conducting the viva voce test, can consist of two sitting Judges of the High Court to be nominated by the Chief Justice, and the Chairman of the Public Service Commission or a Member of the Commission nominated by him.

8. We do not think it necessary or proper to interfere with the selection process already undertaken and hence, we do not think it necessary to grant any relief to the petitioners regarding the challenge to that selection. Nor do we feel it necessary to strike down the Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 1994, as prayed for in O.J.C. No. 6210 of 2001. As soon as the necessary amendment is notified as indicated above, a fresh advertisement for recruitment to the Orissa Judicial Service, Class II will be issued by the Orissa Public Service Commission and the entire process for selection completed as early as possible, in view of the large number of vacancies remaining unfilled.