Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Strikes Down Additional Certificate Requirement for ADA and DDA Post: Directed to Fill-up Vacancies: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking ruling handed down on October 13th, 2023, a Single Judge bench delivered a verdict that will have far-reaching implications for the legal profession. The judgment, which examined the demand for additional certificates of experience from selected candidates for the posts of Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs) and Deputy District Attorneys (DDAs) in the Punjab Prosecution Department, has made a strong statement regarding the definition of legal practice.

"Practice of law is not limited to litigation appearances; it encompasses various facets of legal work," the judgment emphasized.

This decision clarifies the role of regulatory authorities and the powers of state authorities in scrutinizing selected candidates. "The State's authority is confined to assessing antecedents, medical fitness, forgery, nepotism, and favoritism, and cannot introduce additional requirements post-selection," the judgment asserted.

The judgment declared that certain demands made of selected candidates were "arbitrary and unjustified," and highlighted that such demands hindered the selection process. It also suggested corrective measures for the State, allowing them to amend rules to specify requirements for practicing advocates but stressed the importance of clear conditions in advertisements.

The ruling referred to several important cases, includingTej Prakash Pathak v. State of U.P., Bar Council of India v. A.K. Balaji, Devinder Singh v. State of Haryana, and Madan Lal v. State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Punjab and Haryana High Court declared that the demands imposed on selected candidates were "set aside as arbitrary and infringing upon the principles of fairness and equal opportunity." The judgment provided guidance for the State to frame specific criteria for practicing advocates in recruitment notices but with a clear stipulation of such requirements at the outset.

Additionally, the judgment ordered the immediate quashing and setting aside of the letter dated 05.06.2023. It directed the respondents to proceed with filling up the posts of ADAs and DDAs within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

This landmark judgment has sparked discussions within the legal community, with many applauding the broader definition of legal practice. It has raised questions about the scope of regulatory authority and the extent to which the state can impose additional requirements on selected candidates. The legal fraternity is closely watching how this decision will shape the future of legal practice and recruitment processes in the country.

In the words of the representing advocate for the petitioner, Mr. D.S. Patwalia, "This judgment reaffirms the essence of legal practice and underscores the importance of a level playing field in the recruitment of legal professionals."

Date of Decision: 13 October 2023

Jyotsana Rawat and others vs State of Punjab and others

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/13Oct23-Jyotsana_Rawat_And_Ors_vs_State_Of_Punjab_And_Others.pdf"]

Latest Legal News