Chandigarh: The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed the plea filed by some judicial officers of the Haryana Civil Service (judicial branch) challenging the resolution passed by the Punjab and Haryana high court framing certain rules for the promotion of additional district and session judge’s post. The apex court has asked them to approach the Punjab and Haryana high court for “efficacious alternative remedy”.
“Since the petitioners have an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy of moving the HC under Article 226 of the Constitution on the judicial side to challenge the resolution of the full court, we relegate the petitioners to pursue that remedy,” observed the SC in its order.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra of the SC has passed these orders while disposing of the petition filed by Anudeep Kaur Bhatti, a judicial officer of Haryana and others.
The matter pertains to promotion of the judicial officers of Haryana Civil Services (judicial branch) to the Haryana Superior Judicial Services on the rank of ADSJ. The high court had made some amendments in the rules through its resolution of November 30, 2021, providing new criteria including written examination, viva voce for such promotions. After making promotions as per the amended criteria, the HC had promoted 13 judicial officers as ADSJ and sent its recommendations to the Haryana government for notification.
However, the Haryana government has denied notification on the grounds that the state was not consulted while amending the rules. According to the Haryana government, the state is not bound to accept the high court’s recommendations in absence of consultation. A letter dated September 12 was also submitted to the Registrar General of the HC by the Haryana government, declining HC’s resolution, citing some opinion given by the central law ministry on the issue.
Some of the candidates who were into the line of selection as per the HC’s new criteria, had approached the Punjab and Haryana high against delay in notification of their promotions. The matter had reached before the HC in the wake of a plea filed by Sikha, civil judge (senior division), Sonipat, and several other judicial officers of her rank. Taking cognizance of their plea, the HC has already issued notice to the Haryana government seeking a reply on the issue.
We also published the following articles recently
“Since the petitioners have an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy of moving the HC under Article 226 of the Constitution on the judicial side to challenge the resolution of the full court, we relegate the petitioners to pursue that remedy,” observed the SC in its order.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra of the SC has passed these orders while disposing of the petition filed by Anudeep Kaur Bhatti, a judicial officer of Haryana and others.
The matter pertains to promotion of the judicial officers of Haryana Civil Services (judicial branch) to the Haryana Superior Judicial Services on the rank of ADSJ. The high court had made some amendments in the rules through its resolution of November 30, 2021, providing new criteria including written examination, viva voce for such promotions. After making promotions as per the amended criteria, the HC had promoted 13 judicial officers as ADSJ and sent its recommendations to the Haryana government for notification.
However, the Haryana government has denied notification on the grounds that the state was not consulted while amending the rules. According to the Haryana government, the state is not bound to accept the high court’s recommendations in absence of consultation. A letter dated September 12 was also submitted to the Registrar General of the HC by the Haryana government, declining HC’s resolution, citing some opinion given by the central law ministry on the issue.
Some of the candidates who were into the line of selection as per the HC’s new criteria, had approached the Punjab and Haryana high against delay in notification of their promotions. The matter had reached before the HC in the wake of a plea filed by Sikha, civil judge (senior division), Sonipat, and several other judicial officers of her rank. Taking cognizance of their plea, the HC has already issued notice to the Haryana government seeking a reply on the issue.
We also published the following articles recently
Three judicial officers forced to retire
The government has enforced compulsory retirement for three judicial officers based on the recommendation of the HC Chief Justice. The affected officers include the presiding officers of labour courts in Haridwar and Kashipur, as well as an additional district and sessions judge in Dehradun. This decision was made under rule 25A of the Uttarakhand Higher Judicial Service Rules, which allows for compulsory retirement of officers over the age of 50 if they are deemed unfit to continue. This is the first time that three officers from the higher judicial service have been retired simultaneously.
The government has enforced compulsory retirement for three judicial officers based on the recommendation of the HC Chief Justice. The affected officers include the presiding officers of labour courts in Haridwar and Kashipur, as well as an additional district and sessions judge in Dehradun. This decision was made under rule 25A of the Uttarakhand Higher Judicial Service Rules, which allows for compulsory retirement of officers over the age of 50 if they are deemed unfit to continue. This is the first time that three officers from the higher judicial service have been retired simultaneously.
Three judicial officers forced to retire
Three judicial officers in Uttarakhand have been granted forced retirement based on the recommendation of the High Court Chief Justice. The affected officers include the presiding officers of labour courts in Haridwar and Kashipur, as well as an additional district and sessions judge in Dehradun. This decision was made under Rule 25A of the Uttarakhand Higher Judicial Service Rules, which allows compulsory retirement for officers over the age of 50 if they are found unfit for service. It is the first time that three judicial officers from the higher judicial service have been simultaneously retired.
Three judicial officers in Uttarakhand have been granted forced retirement based on the recommendation of the High Court Chief Justice. The affected officers include the presiding officers of labour courts in Haridwar and Kashipur, as well as an additional district and sessions judge in Dehradun. This decision was made under Rule 25A of the Uttarakhand Higher Judicial Service Rules, which allows compulsory retirement for officers over the age of 50 if they are found unfit for service. It is the first time that three judicial officers from the higher judicial service have been simultaneously retired.
About The Author
