· The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Kerala High Court, which set aside the nomination of a District Judge on the basis that, at the time of the order of appointment, he was not a practicing Lawyer and was in the judicial system, serving as a Munsiff.
· Rejanish KV was a practicing lawyer with 7 years of service in the Judiciary when he applied for the office of District Judge. He was already a candidate for the position of Munsiff/Magistrate and, when the District Judge's hiring process was pending, on 28/12/2017 he was appointed Munsiff-Magistrate.
· Post obtaining an authorization for nomination as District Judge, he was released from the Subordinate Judiciary on 21/8/2019 and assumed office as District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, on 24/8/2019.
· Another nominee [K. Deepa] instituted a writ petition before the High Court opposing his nomination, alleging that he was not qualified to be made District Judge because, at the time of his installation as District Judge, he was not a practicing Lawyer and was in the judiciary, serving as a Munsiff.
· This writ plea was issued by the Single Bench, based on the verdict of the Supreme Court in Dheeraj Mor v. High Court of Delhi, in which it was established that a lawyer applying for the position of District Judge by direct induction should remain a practicing Advocate until the date of recruitment.
· While the Sole Judge verdict was upheld throughout the country on the basis of the laws prevailing in the respective States, which can, as in the case of the Kerala Rules, be contrary to the Dheeraj Mor declaration of law.
· Keeping in mind the involvement of Law Of General Principles in the case, it was referred to the Supreme Court.
DO YOU THINK THE VERDICT WAS IN LINE WITH THE SYSTEM? SHARE YOUR OPINIONS IN THE COMMENTS BELOW!
Click here to download the original copy of the judgment