Madhya Pradesh HC Upholds Disqualification Of A District Judge Aspirant Who Has More Than Two Children [Read Judgment]

The independence of the judiciary is not impinged when the High Court itself makes the condition of disqualification in the said Rules applicable for the purpose of recruitment, the Bench said.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld disqualification of a District Judge aspirant who had cleared main examination and interview, but whose candidature was canceled on the ground that she has more than two children and the same being against the conditions mentioned in Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961.

Clause 3 of the advertisement issued by the High Court had clearly mentioned that if a candidate does not fulfill the provisions of M.P. Higher Judicial Service Rules 1994 and M.P. Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961. Challenging the application of said rule, it was contended before the High court that the Rules have not been framed in consultation with the High Court and such Rules impinge upon independence of judiciary.

The Bench of the Chief Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice observed: “The recruitment and promotion conditions are peculiar to the Higher Judicial Service and the Rules govern such aspects. However, general procedural conditions such as the period of probation or the conditions for confirmation are dealt with by the 1961 Rules. The applicability of 1961 Rules to the members of the Higher Judicial Service does not relate to core of judicial service but relates to the procedural aspect which does not cast any shadow on the independence of judiciary.”

The court said that the argument that such Rules have been framed without consultation with the High Court is not tenable as the High Court in the advertisement itself has stipulated that the candidate will be liable to be disqualified if he does not fulfill the conditions of such Rules.

The Court also said that mere participation in the written examination and the interview will not make a candidate eligible if in terms of the advertisement itself the candidate was not eligible for appointment. No right accrues in favour of the petitioner prior to appointment, when the candidature was cancelled on the ground of disqualification under the 1961 Rules, the bench said.

A recent Judgment of High court wherein two judicial officers who were disqualified for the reason that they have more than two children, though the application form never asked them about it, were reinstated, was relied upon.

However, the bench dismissed the argument on the ground that said judgment has not examined the legality of proviso to Rule 3 and the Rule 6 (6) of the 1961 Rules, therefore, the said judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case.