<p>The Supreme Court has declined to consider a plea by a Bengaluru-based advocate that his candidature for the post of district judge has been rejected by the Karnataka High Court, contrary to recommendations of the Justice K J Shetty Commission that there can't be cut off marks in the viva voce test.</p>.<p>"There are several factors considered for appointment of district judge. It is overall personality of the candidates. We cannot intervene," a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy said.</p>.<p>Senior advocate K V Vishwanathan and advocate Sanjay M Nuli, representing the candidate, contended that the apex court had already accepted recommendations made by the Shetty Commission and a similar matter arising out of other states had been referred to the Constitution bench with regard to service conditions and criteria for appointment to district judiciary.</p>.<p>They submitted that till the decision by the Constitution bench, the petitioner's matter should be kept pending.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that his fundamental right has been violated as he was not provided information by the High Court's registrar general, being the recruitment authority, on marks obtained by him and the successful candidates in written examinations as well as the viva voce on the ground that there is no provision under the Karnataka Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2004 for it.</p>.<p>However, the reason assigned for his non-selection was that he did not obtain minimum percentage of marks in viva-voce, even though Justice Shetty, a former Supreme Court judge, had recommended the selection of district judges by way of direct recruitment should be on the aggregate of marks scored in the written examination and viva voce marks, his plea stated.</p>.<p>Refusing to consider the plea, the court asked the petitioner to withdraw the petition but granted him liberty to approach the high court.</p>.<p class="byline">Only four candidates were finally selected to the post of district judge on February 3 last year. As many as eight candidates, including the petitioner, were interviewed by the selection panel headed by the Chief Justice and comprising four senior most judges of the high court, after they cleared the written examinations. The petitioner submitted that his name was placed on the serial number five in the list of successful candidates of the written examination, out of a total of 522 candidates who took up the test to fill up 49 posts of district judges by direct recruitment.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has declined to consider a plea by a Bengaluru-based advocate that his candidature for the post of district judge has been rejected by the Karnataka High Court, contrary to recommendations of the Justice K J Shetty Commission that there can't be cut off marks in the viva voce test.</p>.<p>"There are several factors considered for appointment of district judge. It is overall personality of the candidates. We cannot intervene," a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy said.</p>.<p>Senior advocate K V Vishwanathan and advocate Sanjay M Nuli, representing the candidate, contended that the apex court had already accepted recommendations made by the Shetty Commission and a similar matter arising out of other states had been referred to the Constitution bench with regard to service conditions and criteria for appointment to district judiciary.</p>.<p>They submitted that till the decision by the Constitution bench, the petitioner's matter should be kept pending.</p>.<p>The petitioner claimed that his fundamental right has been violated as he was not provided information by the High Court's registrar general, being the recruitment authority, on marks obtained by him and the successful candidates in written examinations as well as the viva voce on the ground that there is no provision under the Karnataka Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2004 for it.</p>.<p>However, the reason assigned for his non-selection was that he did not obtain minimum percentage of marks in viva-voce, even though Justice Shetty, a former Supreme Court judge, had recommended the selection of district judges by way of direct recruitment should be on the aggregate of marks scored in the written examination and viva voce marks, his plea stated.</p>.<p>Refusing to consider the plea, the court asked the petitioner to withdraw the petition but granted him liberty to approach the high court.</p>.<p class="byline">Only four candidates were finally selected to the post of district judge on February 3 last year. As many as eight candidates, including the petitioner, were interviewed by the selection panel headed by the Chief Justice and comprising four senior most judges of the high court, after they cleared the written examinations. The petitioner submitted that his name was placed on the serial number five in the list of successful candidates of the written examination, out of a total of 522 candidates who took up the test to fill up 49 posts of district judges by direct recruitment.</p>
