Is not article 233(2) a violation of art 14 as it restricts the recruitment only from the advocates and not from others on the basis of their employment with union or state govts?
anonymus (confidential) 04 July 2010
Is not article 233(2) a violation of art 14 as it restricts the recruitment only from the advocates and not from others on the basis of their employment with union or state govts?
K SHANKAR (Consultant) 04 July 2010
What is mentioned in 233(2) is only a qualification based on the practice for 7 years. Hence this is not violative of Article 14 in my opinion since it does not classify people but only qualify people. This is my interpretation.
anonymus (confidential) 04 July 2010
thanks Mr Shankar. As per art 233(2) a person who has completed 7 years of practice and got employed as a judicial magistrate on the eigth year is not entitiled to compete for the post of DJ. But a person who appeared for the recruitment test of JM along with him but did not pass it is eligible to compete to the post of DJ.
In short a person who passed the JM test is not entitled but a person who failed it is entitled.
Is this not discrimination?
Anil Agrawal (Retired) 08 July 2010
I request members to read this judgement. We hardly find such lucid judgements now.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
