Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court

Merit-Cum-Seniority Principle Ensures Judicial Efficiency: Supreme Court Validates High Court of Gujarat's Promotion Criteria for Civil Judges

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India affirmed the High Court of Gujarat's promotion process for Civil Judges (Senior Division) to the post of Additional District Judge under Rule 5(1) of the Gujarat State Judicial Service Rules, 2005. The petitioners challenged the application of the 'Merit-cum-Seniority' principle, asserting it was effectively a 'Seniority-cum-Merit' approach. However, the apex court upheld the promotion process, asserting that it aligned with established judicial standards.

The petitioners, Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta and another, contended that the High Court of Gujarat's promotion method, which included a Suitability Test comprising a Written Test, Evaluation of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), Assessment of Average Disposal, and Evaluation of Judgments, misapplied the 'Merit-cum-Seniority' principle. They argued this process favored seniority over merit, contravening the intended promotion criteria.

Quote from Judgment: "The existence of an alternative remedy under Article 226 does not affect the maintainability of a petition under Article 32. This rule is one of self-restraint and convenience."

Court’s Rationale: The court entertained the petition on merits, emphasizing that alternative remedies do not preclude Article 32 petitions (Paras 37-43).

Quote from Judgment: "The principle of 'Merit-cum-Seniority' does not mandate a comparative merit assessment but rather an assessment of minimum suitability."

Court’s Rationale: The court examined the evolution of promotion principles, statutory provisions, and judicial interpretations, clarifying the distinct modes of recruitment and their objectives (Paras 44-139).

Quote from Judgment: "Enhancing the Suitability Test by including an interview component, raising minimum threshold marks, and evaluating judgments from the last two years ensures a comprehensive assessment of candidates."

Court’s Recommendations: The court suggested improvements to the Suitability Test, such as incorporating an interview component and raising minimum threshold marks (Paras 140-146).

Decision The Supreme Court upheld the High Court of Gujarat's promotion process, confirming that it adheres to the 'Merit-cum-Seniority' principle as established by All India Judges’ Association (3). The Suitability Test was deemed valid and comprehensive, assessing candidates' legal knowledge, efficiency, and case law comprehension. The petition was dismissed, and the Select List dated March 10, 2023, was upheld.

Date of Decision: May 17, 2024

Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta & Anr. vs. High Court of Gujarat & Ors.'

Similar News