LexDAYARAM ASANAND GURSAHANI versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
·-·~·
,..... .
...
703
A
DAYARt.\1 ASANAND GURSAHANf
..
v.
STATE.OF ~AHARASHTRA ~ND omERS _
February 22. 198-l
Htm!xly Ju.!lclul S•r•ft;~ Rtrml;"'"" Rults l9~6.·Sub .clauu (6) of ddu._ (1)
. •I s,lt ml~ (2) nf Rult S. sropt of-S1·niur/1,v--F,,, tlu: p1.1rpoie1 of .J~uit•rity In 1ht
. 111l·t of /Jhtrfri Jmtg~s, M·h~tllt>f th~ p~r/ml durMx wlrL-h onC' lind M'OrA.t·ii ~Hur A.wS..
fJnt JuJr~ .could. bt- rtr.k.tm~d-RiJtfrl to bt po.11C'Cf as till J~~.~pt!ct;,."C Judye an,: Enrilf,_
INtft tath·~ .sofrtf)" nn,/ ol/olll;ances m 1ltt sd~clit.m' grrulf-·Sdt-'ltiun Grod,. l'lhtth~r
•· tttpnratt trodr,
·
The judid~l .., .. ice or tho Sutte or ~hhar,htra consi>l3 or tWO brnn<:h<'-
.. t~J<Iy, (i) the Junitlr Branch und (ii) the Scnl<>r nranch. Tbc Junior Dron<:h con·
0"' of th, followins. Oa\< I Officers~(i) J~Jj\es of l~e Small C>u..._, Courts at places
I
Ot~er th~n llumbay. (ij) Chil. Jude;<!! (Senior ni\i;ion). (iit) Judge.• or the Sn>a~l •.
C.u101 Coun• at llomb1y and Mclropohtnn M"1~i ·Jrat<'i ood (ov) Ctvol Judges puno-
.: or 1)11'i\ion) ~"I Judicial M:Jg~<lrnlcs of the FiNI Ci:J.«. The Senivr lfranch consisl> .
· o_f(i) D<<trict JuJs~ (ii) the Principal Jud&c anJ" Jud1:es ol lloml'lY City Civil Court,
· l~u) the C.'hicr Judge aod the Addl. ChicrJ ud&e of th; Stroll Causes Court, llomblY
. frvl_oh¢ Chief Pre;id~ncy Mngi>tr:tte and tho Additio~tJI Chief (>r.,.;i,i~ncy M~gistratc.
l . a ... b.y, and (v) the A"i'tant Jud~··· · The•• is no separate cadre of !ICI«:tton gmdc
l)i<trict Jud~cs or or ln,pc:ctin" Pi~trict J~d~~< rcfan:d to in tho Rules whi<h are
t • fr.mcj u~der tho proviso' lo Article J09 or the Coo,tituuon. 'fllo IIC'IIIo of I"Y of
:;
nt.trict Jud~
rriur IO July I I Q52 w ... R>. 900.50·1(l('~I600-50-I SOO •.
!;
, •
\
1
i r•
Oo the roconomend,;·tion of the 1-li~h Cuurl, the Sl3to Go,ernrocnl I''""'' two
'tlolutions one on 21_10.1963 und anoth.er 0 ,1 July ~0. 1974 S~~nclioning one post
· UII~fflhe former with cfTcct from J-7-6:! ond fi,e po;l> UllU~f thO lalt<f Witl"f clfcct
from ht AU¥\I<t 1?74 of Oi;trici Ju,l~'"' in' tht S.;lcetiun G:~de of Rs. I 800-100:
2000. which i' ,pccif~~.:ally stated to '"'a l'l rt or the pay scale of~~· 900-1800 appli·
Cltble to the codre of District Judge• .. Conoequont upon the l't\'ISIOn or P<lY ~~ ..
B
c
D
E
F
G·
!
r I
j' "
r
,. I
i
l
'
704
-'
'
SUP'REME COURT REPORTS
[1984] 2 s.c.R.
A .-.· ·of officers of the cadre of the.Ihdian Administrative Service the State Government
~odified the pay sca~e of the selection grade District Judges ~ith effect fro IT! jam,;ary,
1, 1973 by· the resolution· dated August 21, 1975 revising the Selection"Grade Pay'
scale to one of 2000-125-2250. By its eariicr Resolution dated 23-9"1969, the Govern-
ment also sai1ction_ed five temporary posts ~f District Judges in the ~am~ scale of.
Rs. ~00-fSOO.for inspection of su~ordinate Courts and t~ling the' problem of cor-
ruptton. 1he High Court had laid down certain guidelines for posting a District
Judge a·s-an Inspecting District Juuge and they art< (i) that the '6istrict Judge sl1ould
have put in. at least three yeats as District. Judge arid should have worked as such
i~·any of the districts, (ii)..thaJ hls administrative capacity should be rciativcl:r~ high
and (iii) that he should have a rea~onable~ngth 'of service ahead of him as a District
B
(l
D
E
F
G
.....
.r. -
Judge till his retirmcnt.
·
'
-~
'' f .
,.
s
The appellant wa.s enrolled as an Advocate on December 1:4, 1951. 11_1 respon·sc
to the Notification inviting _app1ication5 for the purpose of recruiting rn~mber of
the B:tr directly as District JtJdges under Rule 5(2) {I) (b) of the Rules, t~e appcll~.nt
applied for one or'the posts and was .also successful in gf'tting s~le~ted and appoined
as an Assistant Judge. by notificatiqn issued ori 2-l-1967.~0n Februa1:y IQ, 1973,
the appellant was appointed to officiate in the cadre- of.District Judges and' later
confirmed as a District Judge y;ith effect from Atigust, 1, 1975. The seniority of fhe
.. ...,..
'•
·'
..
,.
'
appellant was fixed on the basis of his actual-appointment as District Judge in April·
1973.
'·
\
./
. The appellant filed a. writ p~tition un'der Article 226 of the constitution con ten-
. ding': (i) that he.was enlitled to reckon for purposes of his seniority in the cadre of ).
· r .- District Judges the period during which he worked as an Assistant Judge in accor.:
dance with the provExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.