'Registry Cannot Adjudicate Maintainability': Judicial Officer's Plea Before SC Against Refusal To Register Curative Petition Against Dheeraj Mor Judgment

A Judicial Officer has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Registry's order in which it refused to register the Curative Petition filed by him against the judgment in Dheeraj Mor vs. High Court of Delhi.

In Dheeraj Mor, a three judge bench of the Apex Court had held that the civil judges are not eligible to seek direct recruitment to post of District Judges in bar quota. 

Syedullah Khaleelullah Khan, [3rd Jt.Civil Judge (Senior Division) Washim, District Washim ( Maharashtra)]  had filed a writ petition seeking reconsideration of the order (paragraph Nos.26-27) passed in the case of All India Judges Association Vs. Union of India and others (2002) 4 SCC 247. This case was tagged along with Dheeraj Mor case and disposed of by a common judgment. Though he pointed out that the relief sought by him is distinct and different from the reliefs sought in other cases and prayed for detaching his petition from other petitions, it was not detached and  it was disposed of by a common judgment dated 19.02.2020. Thereafter, he filed review petition which was also dismissed. Later, he filed curative petition. The Registry refused to register it.

In his plea challenging the Registrar order, he contends that the Registrar (J-IV) is not having any authority or jurisdiction to pass an order to dispose of the petition. "Learned Registrar could not have adjudicated the issue of maintainability of the Curative Petition which was in the realm of the Hon'ble Court.", he states.

"Because Order XL Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules specifically and categorically prescribes that the Court may for sufficient cause shown, excuse the parties from compliance with any of the requirements of these rules, and may give such directions in matters of practice and procedure as it may consider just and expedient. Hon'ble Court cannot pass such order unless the exemption application is placed before the Hon'ble Court by the Registry. Thus, the Registry should have placed the Exemption application filed by the petitioner before the Hon'ble Court for kind consideration. Instead of placing the exemption application before the Hon'ble Court, learned Registrar has disposed of the Curative Petition by passing Lodgment Order dated 08.12.2020. Said order cannot stand even for a moment and hence the same needs to be quashed and set aside.", he contends.

He also refers to the judgment in P. Surendran Vs. State by Inspector of Police (2019) 9 SCC 154, in which it was held that the Registry cannot exercise such jurisdiction which is in the realm of the Hon'ble Court and that the appropriate Bench has to adjudicate the matter of maintainability of the petition as the same is a judicial function.

Dheeraj Mor Case

The issue whether Civil Judges can seek direct recruitment to the post of District Judges against the quota reserved for candidates from Bar was referred to this bench in the case Dheeraj Mor v Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Observing that the case involved a substantial question of law regarding interpretation of Article 233 of the Constitution, a division bench comprising Justices Kurian Joseph and Mohan M Shantanagoudar had made the reference on January 23, 2018. "Article 233(2) nowhere provides eligibility of in-­service candidates for consideration as a District Judge concerning a post requiring 7 years' practice as an advocate or a pleader. Requirement of 7 years' experience for advocate or pleader is qualified with a rider that he should not be in the service of the Union or the State", the bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, Vineet Saran and S Ravindra Bhat said while answering the reference.