Court dismisses petitions challenging the recruitment process, citing lack of evidence for suppression or malafide intent.
In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court has dismissed multiple writ petitions challenging the recruitment process of District Judges (Entry Level) following allegations of improper selection procedures, lack of transparency, and suppression of criminal and civil antecedents. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, held that without concrete evidence of suppression or malafide intent, the discretion exercised by the Selection Committee cannot be interfered with.
The petitions, filed by aspirants N.Bharathirajan and A.Kannan, contended that the selection process was flawed, particularly in the viva voce stage, which allegedly resulted in their poor rankings. Despite these assertions, the court found the grievances to be vague and lacking any substantial basis for intervention.
The court also addressed specific allegations against four successful candidates, including claims that they had suppressed criminal and civil antecedents. For candidate R8, accused of concealing a criminal case, the court noted that there was no suppression, as he was unaware of the proceedings due to non-receipt of summons. Similarly, candidate R22 was found not to have deliberately suppressed details of a prior criminal case that ended in acquittal, which did not compromise his service.
Allegations regarding the eligibility of candidates R18 and R27, who were accused of not having the requisite seven years of practice as advocates, were dismissed by the court. The Bench highlighted that the candidates had produced certificates from Presiding Officers attesting to their practice, fulfilling the requirements of the 2013 Notification.
The judgment underscored the importance of transparency and adherence to the prescribed selection criteria but emphasized the role of senior judges in the Selection Committee, whose discretion should not be lightly questioned. The decision marks a reaffirmation of the integrity of the judicial selection process, balancing the need for transparency with respect for institutional discretion.
The court's dismissal of these petitions reflects a careful consideration of procedural integrity and the absence of any substantial evidence warranting interference with the established selection process.
Bottom line:-
Selection process for District Judges (Entry Level) - Allegations of improper selection process, lack of transparency, and suppression of criminal and civil antecedents - No interference warranted in the absence of concrete evidence of suppression or malafide intent.
Statutory provision(s): Service Law, Recruitment to District Judges (Entry Level), Suppression of criminal antecedents, Recruitment criteria under the 2013 Notification.
N.Bharathirajan v. High Court of Madras, (Madras)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2895435
