Jharkhand District Judge Selection | Supreme Court Disposes Of Plea Challenging Viva-Voce Norms

The Supreme Court, on Friday, directed the Jharkhand High Court to communicate to petitioners and impleaders, who are candidates for the post of District Judge in the State the marks obtained by them in the viva voce examination. The same was directed to be done within a period of four weeks.

A Bench comprising Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Sanjay Karol was hearing plea pertaining to the recruitment to judiciary in Jharkhand. The challenge in the petition is to the new regulation adopted by the High Court, particularly, with respect to viva-voce examination.

Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde appearing for the petitioners apprised the Bench that the recruitment rules require the candidates to get 30% marks in the viva-voce examination, while as per the new regulation adopted by the High Court the requirement is of 50%. He submitted that the petitioners apprehend that their names were not recommended because they did not get 50% marks in viva-voce examination as required by the regulation which is the subject matter of challenge in the present petition. In view of the same, he beseeched the Bench to consider two requests -

1. No appointments be made till the re-opening of the High Court;
2. The marksheet of the candidates be published so that they can ascertain

Justice Bose enquired, “When will the final decision be taken?”

Senior Advocate Sunil Kumar appearing on behalf of the High Court responded, “We have already taken final decision. There were 22 vacancies. The High Court has made recommendation for 13 and the decision is pending with the State Government. There are a number of districts which are going without a district judge.”

He assured the petitioners that they had all obtained more than 50% marks in the viva voce examination and the same is not the basis for not recommending their names for appointment to the post of district judge.

“The ground they are urging now that new regulation is unconstitutional, let me assure that each one of the petitioners have received more than 50% marks and that is not the reason why their names have been recommended by the High Court.”

Considering the same resolves the issue in the present petition, the Bench recorded the statement made by Kumar on behalf of the High Court. While disposing of the writ petition, the Bench also disposed of the impleadment applications. However, the impleaders were given liberty to approach the appropriate forum.

[Case Title: Sushil Kumar Pandey And Ors. v. High Court of Jharkhand And Anr. Writ Petition (Civil) No 475/2023]

Click here to read the order