HIGH COURT OF DELHI versus DEVINA SHARMA

Citation: [2022] 2 S.C.R. 513 · Decided: 14-03-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
513
[2022] 2 S.C.R. 513
513
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
v.
DEVINA SHARMA
(Civil Appeal No 2016 of 2022)
MARCH 14, 2022
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, A. S. BOPANNA
AND HIMA KOHLI, JJ.]
Judiciary: Upper age limit of 32 years appearing for Delhi
judicial Service (DJS) examination and minimum age requirement
of 35 years for appearing for the Delhi Higher Judicial Service
(DHJS) examination – Validity of, challenged – Held: In regard to
the DJS examination 2022 – The High Court conducted the last
examination for recruitment to the DJS in 2019 – No examination
was held in 2020 for institutional reasons and in 2021 due to the
onset of the Covid-19 pandemic – Suggestions of the High Court
were accepted that candidates who would have fulfilled the upper
age limit of 32 years for years 2020 and 2021, would be eligible to
participate in the examination for the ensuing year 2022 – Hence,
the last date of receipt of applications forms were extended and
new date of examination were announced – In regard to DHJS
examination – Clause (1) of Art.233 stipulates that appointments of
persons, posting and promotion of District Judges shall be made by
the Governor of the State in consultation with the High Court
exercising jurisdiction in relation to the State – The Constitution
has prescribed the requirement to the effect that a person shall be
eligible for appointment as a District Judge only if he has been an
advocate or a pleader for at least seven years – What this means is
that a person who has not fulfilled the seven year norm is not eligible
– The Constitution does not preclude the exercise of the rule making
power by the High Courts to regulate the conditions of service or
appointment – The Constitution being silent in regard to the
prescription of a minimum age, the High Courts in the exercise of
their rule making authority are entitled to prescribe such a
requirement – The post of a District Judge is at a senior level in the
cadre – Age is not extraneous to the acquisition of maturity and
experience, especially in judicial institutions which handle real
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
514
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 2 S.C.R.
problems and confront challenges to liberty and justice – The
requirement that a candidate should be at least 35 years of age is
intended to sub-serve this – Hence, there is no valid basis to hold
that the requirement that a candidate for the DHJS should be at
least 35 years of age is invalid – On a parity of reasoning given in
regard to DJS examination, permission given to candidates to appear
in 2022 examination who would have qualified in terms of upper
age limit of 45 years during the recruitment years 2020 and 2021
during which no examinations were held.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The time schedule for conducting the
recruitment process to the judicial service has been stipulated
by the judgment of this Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) vs Uttar
Pradesh Public Service Commission. The object and purpose of
the directions of this Court has been to ensure that the
recruitment process for the judicial service is conducted on
schedule every year, subject to the rules of each High Court.
The High Court of Delhi held its last examination for recruitment
to DJS in 2019. Admittedly, no examination has been held in 2020
or in 2021. The examination for 2020 could not be conducted
since the process for 2019 was still to be completed. The
examination for 2020 could not be held due to the onset of the
Covid-19 pandemic. In this backdrop, since the examination was
not conducted for two recruitment years, the High Court has after
considering the issue stated before this Court that as a one-time
measure, this Court may accept the suggestion that candidates
who would have qualified for the examinations were they to be
held on schedule for recruitment years 2020 and 2021 in terms
of the rules as they then stood, may be permitted to appear for
the ensuing examinations. [Para 18][522-G-H; 523-A-D]
1.2 Having regard to the fact that the recruitment
examination for DJS has been last held in 2019 and two recruitment
years have elapsed in the meantime, this Court observed that
the suggestion of the High Court should be accepted for this
year. The consequence of the acceptance of the suggestion by
this Court, would be that candidates who would have fulfilled the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
515
upper age limit of 32 years, for the recruitment years 2020 and
2021 would be eligible to participate in the examination for the
ensu

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.