STATE OF KERALA versus M.K. KRISHNAN NAIR & ORS.

Citation: [1978] 2 S.C.R. 864 · Decided: 14-02-1978 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HAMEEDULLAH BEG · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

864 
A 
SUPREME 
COURT 
REPORTS 
[1978] 2 S·C·R· 
STATE OF KERALA 
v. 
M. K. KRISHNAN NAIR & ORS. 
AND 
K. SUKUMARAN NAIR & ANR. 
v. 
M. K. KRISHNAN NAIR & ORS. 
February 14, 1978 
{M. H. BEG, c. J., P. N. BHAGWATI, v. R. KRISHNA lYER, 
s. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, P. N. SHINGHAL, JASWANT SINGH 
•C 
AND V. D. TULZAPURKAR, JJ .] 
J) 
:H 
lCerala Judicial Service Rule~. 1966-Scope of-Judicial Service bifurcated 
into Civil Judicial Service and Criminal Judicial Servict!>-State Government, 
if competent to bifurcd!e-Classification made under the Rules-if reason-
able. 
In the erstwhile State of Travancore Cochin recruitment to the posts of 
Munsi.ffs was governed by the Travancore Cochin Munsiffs Recruitment Rules, 
1953. After the . formation of the new State of Kerala the Kerala Judicial 
Service (Recruitment of Munsiffs) Rules, 1957 were framed replacing the 
1953 Rules. By G.O. No. 850 dafed September 24, 1959 the 1957 Rules 
were amended to make District Magistrates and Sub-Divisional Magistrates, 
Grades I and II, eligible for appointment as Sub-Judges and Munsiifs. By 
G.O. No. 851 dated September 24, 1959 three posts of District Magistrates 
and eight posts of Sub-Divisional Magistrates were constituted into a separate 
service outside the civil judiciary so that the incumbents of those costs might 
continue in them. 
It was further provided therein that those 
posts 
would 
cease to exist when the incumbents vacated them by retirement or promo-
tion. To further the object of absorption of the excluded magisterial officers 
into the civil judiciary ad hoc rules were framed in February, 1966 providing 
that the magisterial officers of the former Tranvancore Cochin State holding 
posts of District Magistrates shall be eligible for appointment as Munsiffs in 
the Kerala State Judicial Service. 
In 1966 the Kerala State Judicial Service Rules (Special Rules) were 
framed, r. 5 of which provides that the service shall consist of officers belong-
ing to category I Subordinate Judges, which term shall include Subordinate 
Judges posted as District Magistrates (Judicial) and Category II Munsiffs 
which term shall include Munsiffs posted as Sub-Divisional Magistrates. Rule 
6 provides that appointments to Category I will be by promotion 
from 
Munsiffs and for Category II appointment shall be made either by direct 
recruitment from Bar or by transfer from three named categories, including 
Additional First Class Magistrates and Sub-Magistrates. 
By a Government Order dated February 12, 1973 (Exhibit P 1) the State 
Government bifurcated the then existing Judicial Service into two senrices, 
namely, the Kerala Civll Judicial ServiOe consisting of 
Sub-Judges 
and 
Munsiffs and the Kerala Criminal Judicial Service 'consisting of 
District 
Magistrates (Judicial) Sub-Divisional Magistmtes, 
Additional 
First 
OaM 
Magistrates and Sub-Magistrates. Para 3 of the Government Order provides; 
(i) that option will be allowed to all civil judicial officers originally borne 
on the Magistracy irrespective of wheiher or not they have been confirmed 
as full members of the Kerala State Judicial Service to ·go over to the criminal 
wi.ng; (ii) that those who opt to the criminal wing and whose options would 
be accepted by Government will be given posting in the new Criminal 
Judicial Service, (iii) that all the posts of Sub-Divisional Magistrates will be 
\ 
( 
KERALA V. M. K. KRISHNAN 
865 
released for members of the new Criminal Judicial Service and the thea 
A 
incumbents in the posts of Sub-Divisional Magistrates will accordingly be 
po~ted back as Munsiffs, with the implementation of the scheme, (iv) that 
persons who have been appointed as District Magistrates on or before the 
date of implementation of the scheme wlll be allowed to continue as such, 
retaining their membership in the civil judiciary, 'till they are appointed to 
higher Judicial Service or retire from service, and (v) that if the number of 
officers who opt to the criminal wing happens to- be ;in excess of the number 
of posts available for accommodating them in the Criminal Judicial Service. 
such officers found in excess will be retained in Civil Judiciary for eventual 
B 
absorption in the Criminal Judiciary as and when vacancies arise consistent 
with their original seniority in the criminal wing. 
The writ petitioner was originally appointed as a District Munsiff in the 
Kerala Judicial Service and was eventually confi,rmed as a Sub-Judge. 
After 
the scheme of b

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