No Retrospective Operation Of Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services Rules 2017: SC

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

• On 27 May 2008, the Petitioner was appointed as a District Judge in the entry level, in the direct recruitment to the Higher Judicial Services in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
• For the determination of seniority on the basis of point roster, he preferred representations between 02.08.2010 and 31.05.2014, as per the directions of this Court in All India Judges' Association & Ors. v. Union of India.
• Considering the grounds that the 2017 Rules came into force with effect from 13.03.2018 and are prospective in operation, his preferred representations were rejected on 11 September 2019.

CONTENTIONS RAISED

• The Petitioner contended before the Apex Court that in All India Judges' Association (supra), the High Courts were directed by the Supreme Court to amend the seniority rule and include the roster system for determining the inter-se seniority of District Judges.
• The occurrence for the delay in the amendment of Rules cannot be detrimental to the interest of the directly recruited District Judges,
• Therefore, their seniority must be re-determined on the basis of roster by retrospective effect being given to the 2017 Rules.
• The High Court submitted that the 2017 Rules are prospective and the representations which were preferred by the direct recruits for the benefit of roster system from a prior date were already rejected by the Administrative Committee of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.

OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE COURT

• The Division Bench comprising of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose, observed that, the roster can be prepared and maintained only after the operation of the Rules have been commenced.
• Further the Court added that seniority inter-se direct recruits and promotees shall be determined on the basis of roster, only after the introduction of the 2017 Rules.
• The Court held that the delay in commencing the seniority rule in accordance with the direction, as given in All India Judges' Association case, is unreasonable and unjustified.
• But even then, the Petitioners cannot be allowed the relief of the 2017 Rules as retrospective effect.
• While rejecting the writ petition, the Court said that, the Petitioners cannot claim that their seniority has to be reworked on the basis of roster as directed by this Court in All India Judges' Association (supra) case.

WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ABOUT IT?