The Supreme Court on Friday held a decision taken by the Gujarat High Court in March this year and ratified by the state government a month later, to promote judicial officers to the cadre of district judge, as illegal and contrary to the rules and regulations.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar said this court is more than prima facie satisfied that the decision is not sustainable as it is also contrary to the Supreme Court judgement in the case of All India Judges’ Association (2002) laying down merit-cum-seniority principle. “We stay the further implementation and operation of the Select List,” the bench said also noting that the HC has adopted the wrong method in the selection process.
It also pointed out at present the respective promotees have not assumed their posting on the promotional post and as such were sent for training.
The respective promotees should be sent to their original posts which they were holding prior to their promotion, it ordered.
“However, it is clarified that the order shall be confined with respect to those promotees whose names do not figure within the first 68 candidates in the Merit List on the basis of the merits. Meaning thereby, the promotion of those promotees, whose names otherwise do figure in the first 68 candidates in the Merit List shall be continued as even otherwise and even if the writ petition is allowed, in that case also, they will get the promotion on merits,” the bench said.
The court ordered for placing the writ petition filed by aggrieved judicial officers Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta and another for further hearing before a bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, subject to decision taken on administrative side.
The petitioners here questioned the promotion of Senior Civil Judges to the Cadre of District Judge (65% quota) as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution as
well as Rule 5 of the Gujarat State Judicial Service Rules, 2005.
The bench noted in the case, the HC considered the merits only for the purpose of achieving benchmark and switched to the principle of seniority-cum-merit and thereby has given a go-by to the principle of merit-cum-seniority.
The court also rejected a contention that same rules were being followed since 2011, saying, “Merely because, a wrong method is being adopted cannot be a ground to perpetuate the same, if it is found to be illegal.”