Case Details Malik Mazhar Sultan & Anr. vs U P Public Service Commission & Ors. in the Matter Of: State of Haryana Ia No. 53466 of 2022 in

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

26 September 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 1867 of 2006

Result

Dismissed

Bench

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra

Citation

[2023] 12 S.C.R. 682 : 2023 INSC 860

Issue for consideration

The State of Haryana sought a direction that it should be permitted to conduct the entire selection process of recruiting judicial officers through the Public Service Commission and the order dated 12.02.2009 should be modified to facilitate this exercise. Judicial Service – Selection process – State Government sought selection process of recruiting judicial officers to be done through the Public Service Commission – State Government not able to place sufficient material to warrant deviation from the course of action pursued since 2007:

Headnote

Held: The order dated 04.01.2007 of the Supreme Court specifically noted the importance of making timely appointments to the District Judiciary – Order dated 11.05.2007 found fault with the understanding of the High Court that the entire process would be carried out exclusively by the High Court – This order, however, was modified on 12.02.2009 so as to allow the selection process which was then underway to be concluded by a process in which the Committee for selection composed of the Judges nominated by the Chief Justice and the representatives of the State and the Public Service Commission – The process which has been followed in the State of Haryana is that the State Government has notified alterations in the Rules so as to facilitate the selection process to the judicial service being conducted under the supervision of a Committee consisting of three-Judges of the High Court nominated by the Chief Justice, two representatives of the State Government and a member of the Public Service Commission – It is undisputed that since 2007, Rule 7B (Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Haryana Amendment Rules 2020) was substituted so as to allow the selection process to be conducted as mentioned above – If the State Government wished to bring about any change in that position, it was incumbent upon it to consult the High Court and to do so based on cogent material bearing on objective data indicating the justification for abrogating the involvement of the High Court in conducting the selection examination and overseeing the process – However, the State Government has not placed sufficient material to warrant a deviation from the course of action which has been pursued since 2007, for over fifteen years, including, as recently as by the notification dated 14.12.2020 – Accordingly, the request made by the State Government cannot be accepted. [Paras 20, 21, 23 and 24] OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI 1. An application has been filed by the State of Haryana in the proceedings in Malik Mazhar Sultan v U P Public Service Commission 1 seeking two directions: (i) The recruitment of judicial officers in the Judicial Branch of the Haryana Civil Service be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Part C of the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules 19512 (as applicable to State of Haryana); and (ii) The order of this Court dated 12 February 2009 in IA 60 of 2008 filed by the High Court of Punjab and H

View Subscription Plans →