LexMADAN LAL versus HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A 8 c [2014] 4 S.C.R. 226 MADAN LAL V. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos.1393-1394 of 2002) MARCH 28, 2014 [SURIN.JER SINGH NIJJAR AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ]. PUBLIC INTEREST LIT/GA TION: Appeals before Supreme Court - Arising out of writ petitions filed before High Court - Challenging selection and appointment to post of District and Sessions Judge - Held: Appellants have stated that they have no grievance against 0 any of the selected candidates in the particular selection - Therefore, if at all, their grievances are to be considered relating to ascertainment of quota for direct recruit posts, it would only amount to Public Interest Litigation which cannot be permitted in the instant appeals - As per the guidelines and decisions of Supreme Court, in service matters Public E Interest Litigation is not maintainable - Jammu and Kashmir Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1983. The instant appeal arose out of the writ petitions filed before the High Court. The challenge on various grounds F related to selection and appointment to the post of District and Sessions Judge borne on the cadre of the service constituted in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1983. The High Court, by the impugned judgment, answered all the points raised in G seriatim. Dismissing the appeals, the Court H 226 MADAN LAL v. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR 227 HELD: A The appellants have stated that they have no grievance against any of the selected candidates in the particular selection. Therefore, if at all, the appellants' grievances are to be considered, relating to ascertainment of quota for direct recruit posts in the instant appeals, it would only amount to a consideration B by way of a Public Interest Litigation which cannot be permitted to be made, more so, when the appellants have chosen not to challenge the selection of any one of the candidates by way of direct recruitment or any of the C promotees. The instant appeals cannot be entertained since as per the guidelines of this Court as well as based on the earlier decisions of this Court, it has baen held that in service matters Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable. (para 7, 9 and 10) (236-B-C, G; 233-0) D Hari Bansh Lal vs. Sahodar Prasad Mahto - 2010 (10) SCR 561 = (2010) 9 sec 655 - relied on. Case Law Reference: 2010 (10) SCR 561 relied on para 9 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 1393-1394 of 2002. From the Judgment and Order dated. 31.01.2000 of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu in SWP Nos. 333 of 1999 and O.W.P. No. 1641 of 1999. WITH Civil Appeal No. 1395 of 2002. Subhash Chander Mansotra, Jagpal Sharma Appellants- in-person. Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Purnima Bhat, E F G Dinesh Kumar Garg, Ashok Mathur for the Respondents. H 228 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2014] 4 S C.R. A The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J. 1. These Appeals are directed against a common Judgment of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir dated 31.01.2000 rendered in B S.W.P. No.333of1999 and O.W.P. No.1641 of 1999 and other connected writ petitions. The Appellants herein were Petitioners in S.W.P. No.333 of 1999 and S.W.P. No.260 of 1999. In the Writ Petition(s) the challenge was to the selection and appointment to the post of District and Sessions Judge borne on the cadre of the service constituted under the Rules, C namely, "The Jammu and Kashmir Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1983" (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1983"). The recruitment and appointment to the said cadre under the aforesaid Rules is from two sources, namely, 75% by way of promotion of in service candidates and 25% by direct D recruitment. The challenge in the Writ Petition(s) related to the selection and appointment of candidates under the direct quota pursuant to the modified Notification No.16 of 1997 dated 05.09.1997. The earlier notification was Notification No.50 of 1995 dated 01.08.1995. As per the modified notification, four E posts were advertised out of which two were for general category and one each for reserved categories of Schedule Caste and resident of Backward Area. The High Court conducted the written examination and declared the list of successful candidates. Candidates were called for viva-voce F test on 27.02.1999. They were interviewed by the Committee constituted by the High Court
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.