No promotions, tweaked service rules: Dist judges move SC

Bhopal/Jabalpur: A group of district judges filed a special leave petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging the order of a division bench of the MP High Court, which struck down an amendment in the MP Higher Judicial Services Rules-1994, introduced in 2015.
The amendment allowed the high court to fill the posts of district judge (entry point) by judges from the district court if appropriate candidates were not found from the Bar quota (advocates' quota) in two consecutive exams.
After the high court decision, promotions given to 47 judges against the advocates' quota in 2016 and 2017 were also cancelled, and they were restored to their original place in the gradation list. A group from among them moved the Supreme Court with the SLP, which is likely to come up for hearing on Monday.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain, while holding the 2015 amendment in the rule as null and void, said that creating a fourth channel for appointment to the post of district judge (entry point) is illegal. According to the original rules, 50 percent of the posts of district judge (entry point) are filled by promotion and 25 percent each by lawyers and civil judges, who appear in an exam conducted by the MP High Court and get selected. However, the amendment in 2015 provided that the seats meant for advocates would be filled by the promotion of civil judges if appropriate candidates from the Bar were not found in two consecutive exams.
The court also revoked the promotion of 47 judges in 2016 and 2017 and said they should be placed in the gradation list at their original place. Since judges of their batch have already been promoted as district judge (entry point), they would continue to work in the post they are holding. The petitioner, Sapna Jhunjhunwala, an advocate, in her petition, said that the amendment brought about in 2015 in the MP Higher Judicial Services Rules mandates that the posts of the advocates' quota will be filled by civil judges if the posts remain vacant in two consecutive exams due to a lack of suitable candidates. This has opened a fourth channel for appointment to the post of district judge (entry level), which is illegal. In 2016 and 2017, 47 civil judges were promoted against the seats meant for advocates.