Not Getting Good Candidates For District Judges, All Chief Justices Saying This : CJI DY Chandrachud
In a plea filed by lawyers who had appeared for Mains Examination conducted for recruitment of ADJs in the State of Rajasthan assailing the result dated 01.10.2022, the Supreme Court, on Thursday, asked the petitioners to approach the concerned High Court. "We are of the considered view there is no reason why a petition cannot be filed before HC under Article 226…Should...
In a plea filed by lawyers who had appeared for Mains Examination conducted for recruitment of ADJs in the State of Rajasthan assailing the result dated 01.10.2022, the Supreme Court, on Thursday, asked the petitioners to approach the concerned High Court.
"We are of the considered view there is no reason why a petition cannot be filed before HC under Article 226…Should the petitioner institute proceedings before the HC, we will request the Ld. CJ to ensure that it is assigned to a bench of the court so that finality can be brought down to the process of recruitment expeditiously."
Apart from challenging the result the petitioners have also sought re-evaluation of their papers and award of bonus marks, and consideration in line with the judgment in Pranav Verma v. Registrar General of Punjab & Haryana High Court so that candidates equal to three times the vacancies notified can be called for interview.
As Advocate, Mr. Prashant Bhushan appearing on behalf of the petitioners mentioned the matter before a Bench comprising CJI, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Hima Kohli and J.B. Pardiwala, the matter was taken on Board.
Mr. Bhushan appraised the Bench that though there were 85 vacancies for the post of ADJs, but only 4 candidates were called for interview.
The CJI remarked -
"We are not getting candidates for lateral entry all over the country. The general pool is so bad now. We are not saying anything about your client. This is across the county. All CJs are saying this."
Mr. Bhushan submitted that the recruitment brochure says that 250 candidates would be called for interview, instead only 4 were called.
He indicated that there ought to be something wrong in the marking process. He requested if a retired judge of the Apex Court is asked to re-evaluate the papers. He also informed the Bench that the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court had constituted a Committee to hear grievances of the representatives of the Bar in regard to recruitment of ADJs.
Considering, Mr. Bhushan's request, the Bench recorded in the order -
"Mr. Bhushan submitted that, if the answer sheets can be re-evaluated by a judge. We leave it open to the petitions to make this request before the High Court."