LexMAHARASHTRA STATE JUDGES ASSOCIATION & ORS. versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008) 17 S.C.R. 247 MAHARASHTRA ST ATE JUDGES ASSOCIATION & ORS. A ..... v. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY & ANR. (Writ Petition (C) No. 211 of 2007) DECEMBER 11, 2008 B ~ [K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ., R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND J.M. PANCHAl., JJ.] Maharashtra Judicial Service (Seniority) Rules, 2007: c rr.4(1)(ii) proviso and r.4(2)- Various categories of Higher Judicial Service put into unified cadre of District Judges w.e.f. 1. 7. 1996 - Seniority of officers appointed as District Judges or Judges of City Civil Court between 1. 7.1996 and 31.3.2003 D, protected - Claim that date of caderisation should be .. 31.3. 1994 and not 1. 7.1996 and seniority of all officers to be reckoned from date of entry into service - Held: Caderisation was rightly given effect from 1. 7. 1996 - Those in the category of Additional District Judges or Additional Chief Judges of E -Small Causes Court have not made any legal right to be placed above those recruited to the higher posts of District Judges or Judges of City Civil Court between 1. 7. 1996 and 31.3.2003 - Validity of the Rules upheld. > The Supreme Court of India, by its orders dated F ·-· ~ 13.11.1991 passed in All India Judges' Association (1)1, adopting the view of the Law Commission in its fourteenth report, directed the Union of India to take appropriate steps to bring about uniformity in the hierarchy, designations and jurisdictions of judicial G' officers of subordinate courts in the country. By a ,,,,, subsequent order dated 24.8.19932, the Court extended 't 1. All India Judges' Association (I) vs. Union of India 1991 Suppl.(2} SCR 206. 2. All India Judges Association(//) vs. Union of India), 1993 Suppl. (1) SCR749. 247 H 248 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 17 S.C.R. A the time upto 31.3.1994 to comply with the directions. Consequently, the Government of India constituted the First National Judicial Pay Commission (Justice Shetty Commission) which by its report dated 11.11.1999 proposed to provide uniform pay scales to be given effect s from 1.7.1996, to the Judicial Officers by dividing them into three levels: (i) Civil Judge (Junior Division) (ii) Civil Judge (Senior Division), and (iii) District Judges. The Court by its order dated 31.3.2002 3 accepted the recommendations of Shetty Commission, and directed c the High Courts and the State Governments to amend their rules to bring them in conformity with its directions. Accordingly, the High Court of Bombay appointed a Committee comprising four Judges (Justice Kapadia Committee) which by its report 1 dated 24.8.2002 grouped various cadres of Higher Judicial Service of the State into D one single Cadre of District Judges consisting of District Judges, Joint District Judges and Judges of City Civil Court (Category-I), Chief Judges, Small Causes Court (Category-1A) Additional District Judges and Additional Chief Judges, Small Causes Court (Category-II), and E recommended that 1.7.1.1996 should be the date of; caderisation. For the purpose of seniority,.the Committee recommended that Judicial Officers grouped in Category I would en block rank senior to Category-1A and the latter. would en block rank senior to. Category-II and inter se F seniority wJthin ·eac~ block would be based on the date of entry into the s.ervice as per;Jhe seniority basis.in t~e old cadre. These recommendations were challenged in writ petitions filed before the Supreme Court by City ·Civil Court Judges and the District Judges appointed directly G from the Bar between 1.7.1996 and 21.3.2002, the date of decision in the case of All India Judges' Association (Ill). On the directions of the Supreme Court, the High Court of Bombay constituted anot~er Committee (Justice 3. All India Judges' Association (Ill) vs. Union of India & Ors. 2002 (2) SCR H 712=(2002) 4 sec 247. " .,... ...... MAHARASHTRA STATE JUDGES ASSON. & ORS. v. 249 REGISTRAR GENERAL & ANR. Gokhale Committee) which submitted its report on A --~ 19.9.2006 reiterating the unified cadre of District Judges and the date of caderisation to be 1.7.1996 as was recommended by Justice Kapadia Committee. But taking note of hardship to certain sections, on account qf retrospective caderisation, it recommended to protect the B seniority of the Judicial Officers who obtained their positions either as City Civil Judges or District Judges ·~ by direct appointment or by promotion
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.