Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(19). A Division Bench comprising of the Chief Justice, Dr. AR. Lakshmanan and Justice Rajesh Balia, in Dalpat Raj Bhandari vs. President of India and others. (4), has held as under:-

"Thus, it is seen that the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and High Courts are constitutional functionaries and are discharging sovereign functions of administration of justice and none of them is in public employment. It has been held in the case of All India Judges Association and others vs. Union of India (AIR 1993 SC 2493) that the judicial service is not service in the sense of employment and that the Judges are not employees. As members of the judiciary, they exercise the sovereign judicial power of the State. They are holders of public office in the same way as the members of the Legislature and that there cannot be a link between the service conditions of the Judges and those of members of the other services. The appellant has contended that Article 16 of the Constitution is attracted in the case of appointment of Judges. Such contention, in our opinion, is fallacious. Article 16(1) reads that there shall be equality of opportunity for alt citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. The appointment of a Judge of the Supreme Court or High Court is neither an employment nor an appointment of any office under the State but it is an independent constitutional function discharged by the persons so appointed and it is certainly not an appointment to in office under the State. Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 16 guarantee equality of opportunity to all citizens in the matter of appointment to any office or of any other employment under the State. Clauses (3) to (5) however, lay down exceptions to the above rule of equal opportunity.