Supreme Court allows Madhya Pradesh HC to interview prospective civil judges
Supreme Court
on Thursday allowed the
Madhya Pradesh High Court
to conduct interviews and declare results of the Civil Judge, Junior Division (Entry Level) Exam 2022.
A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar asked the high court to go ahead with the process after it was informed that 77 candidates had cleared the main civil judges exam.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
PGDM
Data Science
CXO
MBA
Project Management
Data Analytics
Others
healthcare
Public Policy
Cybersecurity
Operations Management
Data Science
others
Degree
Design Thinking
MCA
Digital Marketing
Product Management
Healthcare
Artificial Intelligence
Technology
Finance
Management
Leadership
Skills you'll gain:
Financial Analysis & Decision Making
Quantitative & Analytical Skills
Organizational Management & Leadership
Innovation & Entrepreneurship
Duration:
24 Months
IMI Delhi
Post Graduate Diploma in Management (Online)
Starts on
Sep 1, 2024
Get Details
The top court passed the order after advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, appearing for the high court, said a re-exam was unconstitutional, impractical and would floodgates of
litigation
.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Victoria Principal Is Almost 75, See Her Now
Reportingly
Undo
The top court last year stayed a Madhya Pradesh High Court order restraining recruitment for the post of civil judges carried out without the mandatory requirement of three years of practice.
The Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 were amended on June 23, 2023, to make three years of practice compulsory to be eligible to appear for the civil judge entry-level test in the state.
Live Events
The amended rules were upheld by the high court, but it started another round of litigation after two candidates who were not selected contended that they would be eligible if the amended rules were applied and demanded that the cut-off be reviewed.
While restraining the recruitment to the post, the high court directed the exclusion of successful candidates in the preliminary examination who did not fulfil the eligibility criteria under the
amended recruitment rules
.
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the June 13, 2024 order passed by its division bench directing it to weed out or exclude all those successful candidates in the preliminary examination held on January 14, 2024, who did not fulfil the eligibility criteria under the amended rules.
In its appeal, the high court said the division bench failed to appreciate that the power to review a well-reasoned judgment is very limited and only open when there is a mistake and error apparent on the face of the record.
"It is submitted that the conducting of fresh main examination for specific candidates falling between earlier cut-off marks and re-computed cut-off marks in compliance of impugned order/judgment would result in a situation where there would be no level playing field," the appeal said.
An advertisement was issued on November 17, 2023, calling for applications from eligible law graduates under the amended recruitment rules.
The top court while hearing a challenge to the amended recruitment rules by an interim order permitted all law graduates to appear in the preliminary examination.
A division bench of the high court subsequently dismissed the petitions challenging the amendment and upheld the amended recruitment rules.
A petition was then filed by two persons claiming both were eligible under the amended recruitment rules and had appeared in the preliminary examination but could not make it to the main examination but a high court division bench dismissed their plea.
The two petitioners, Jyotsna Dohalia and Varsha Shrivastava, then filed a review plea on May 25, 2024, which was allowed and the high court restrained recruitment for the post of civil judge.
According to the amended Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, three years of practice was a mandatory requirement to appear for judicial services examination at the civil judge level.
The amendment exempts outstanding law graduates who have secured at least 70 per cent marks in the general and Other Backward Class (OBC) categories from the mandatory requirement of three years of practice.
The division bench of the high court in its order had said that the cut-off marks shall be re-computed, upon the remaining candidates satisfying the criteria under amended recruitment rules.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Suhas Palshikar writes: Left Wing Extremism is a smokescreen. Maharashtra's new law could criminalise dissent
What you require is a dictionary, the Supreme Court is reported to have told the SIT in the Ali Khan Mahmudabad case recently. Very soon, the courts may have to say, what you need is a set of Political Science books. The need to read Political Science literature may be necessitated by the mention of Left Wing Extremism (LWE) in a bill passed by the Maharashtra legislature in the name of protecting public security. Indeed, there is a separate section under the Ministry of Home Affairs that deals with LWE but one is not sure that there is a clear legal definition of LWE. The MHA portal says that LWE refers to organisations that are banned and listed as an appendix to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. But that hardly satisfies the test of what conceptually constitutes LWE. Broad innuendos making the rounds in the public domain refer to Maoism. In operational terms, the provisions refer to the use of violence for the overthrow of the state. But since the Maharashtra government now intends to incriminate Left Wing ideology, the onus is on the government to specify what it means by it. In the absence of clarity, anyone can be accused of subscribing to Left Wing ideology, and then the police will be running from one library to another for material on what constitutes Left Wing ideas. The current dispensation in Maharashtra and nationally is allergic to the idea of the 'Left'. Therefore, it will do well to come forward and define for legal purposes which ideas are construed as Left and are hence liable to be proscribed. Maoist violence in many parts of the country has invited a reaction of repulsion even among those who may have a leftward leaning. That repulsion is tactically utilised intellectually and cinematically by some who employ the term 'urban Naxal'. Even the Maharashtra Chief Minister has repeatedly referred to urban Maoism. What is overlooked is the distinction between those who actively mobilise Maoist violence against the state, those who sympathise with such organisations and those who do not endorse such violence but subscribe to the idea that the stranglehold of capital over state authority needs to be removed. The other problem with the Maharashtra law is that it incriminates a number of activities that are already proscribed by various laws and thus there is a vicious duplication of legal instruments giving the executive and the police unseemly discretionary powers on whether to book someone under this law, under UAPA or a more routine law penalising crime and violence. We regularly witness instances of how executive discretion results in overenthusiasm and even partisan vendetta. The new law will be an additional instrument to harass civil society. Given that it precludes the bail provision and recourse to lower courts, one can only imagine its likely draconian effects. Perhaps the most worrisome provisions in this law pertain to freedom of speech and expression. True, we routinely get a dose of pontification from the judiciary that freedom — and freedom of expression, in particular — is not absolute. It is nobody's case that in the Indian context, this freedom is absolute or without constraints. But the central question that law-makers and the judiciary must answer is not whether freedom of expression is or should be absolute. The question is whether restraints on freedom of expression can be random and arbitrary. Scholars of the Indian Constitution have argued that writing down the restrictions on the freedom of expression produces a concrete limiting effect on the executive and legislature. The written restrictions guarantee that governments or state authorities will not have unlimited powers to curb the freedom of expression. Also, the constitutional scheme of things requires the test of reasonableness. Restrictions have to be reasonable. Courts are therefore not to tell a citizen what she should reasonably express but to examine if the enforced limitations are reasonable. In the backdrop of the judiciary's abdication of this sacrosanct duty, the provisions in Maharashtra's bill could be dangerous and ill-intended. Under this new law, 'unlawful' activities are defined as activities 'by act or words… or by sign or by visible representation'. In other words, freedom of expression, besides actual acts, is intended to be criminalised. As a member of the legislature publicly stated after the passage of the bill, holding seminars (purportedly on objectionable matters, in that lawmaker's view) will be punished by the new law. Therein exists a dual danger. One, any dog-whistling can easily activate the police machinery, and there is no mechanism to first examine such random complaints emanating from ideological or political rivals before action is taken; the Advisory Board comes into the picture only after action is taken by the police. Two, any intellectual activity can easily be brought under the purview of unlawful activity. What constitutes incitement to violence will always be a ticklish issue legally, morally and politically. For the sake of argument, let us admit that 'incitement' may be legitimately criminalised. In that case, incitement against minorities — indulged in even by some members of the state government — should also be criminalised. But since such perpetrators are not Left Wing, this law would turn a blind eye towards that incitement. As the new law says, any acts through words that 'constitute danger to peace and tranquility', 'acts of generating fear and apprehension in the public', 'preaching disobedience of law and its institutions' are construed as unlawful. A plain reading of these phrases should alert any citizen. Because, while the law mentions LWE, these political acts are the common language of democratic mobilisation and as such practically any social worker can be booked for extending a verbal criticism of authorities and appealing to citizens to protest. Any stringent criticism can be construed as endangering tranquility. Thus, the language of 'urban Naxal' is a smokescreen. The tameness and intellectual laziness of the Opposition in Maharashtra is such that it is content with limiting the powers under this law to LWE. In its abject muteness, the Opposition in Maharashtra has shown that it is following in the footsteps of the loyal Opposition in Gujarat. Following legislation in Chhattisgarh, Odisha etc, this law raises wider issues beyond being Left or non-Left. It is about the idea of the state and protests: Whether the state can be critiqued in a democracy and whether a self-proclaimed democratic state should be criminalising protest, dissent and difference of opinion. The writer, based in Pune, taught Political Science
Hans India
28 minutes ago
- Hans India
BC Commission yet to get report on caste survey!
Hyderabad: The BC Commission, which was part of the caste survey, is yet to receive the report. This is not only hampering critical study regarding implementation of BC reservation in the State, but also affecting timely responses by the Commission to the pending Supreme Court cases. According to sources, the BC Commission on several occasions wrote to the Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy and Deputy CM Mallu Bhatti Vikramarka, the latter who is also handling the Planning Department for a copy of the report. The Commission was actively involved in door-to-door survey and conducted public hearings while camping various districts across Telangana under the deadlines. Ironically, even the Independent Expert Working Group (IEWG) recently submitted a 300-page report to the government and even this report could not be accessed by the BC Commission. 'The situation is that we even asked the members of the expert group for the copy. But they denied saying that it would be placed in the public domain shortly and the government will take a call,' told the sources to The Hans India. The Commission yearns for the report as all major decisions concerning the BCs depend on it. It also needs to respond to Supreme Court's cases. One such case is regarding removal of 26 castes from AP origin following bifurcation. 'Until and unless we study the report we can arrive at a decision. The Supreme Court has sought opinion regarding the case and we are awaiting to submit a reply. How can we respond till we have real figures related to the case?' wondered one of the members.
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
"Our uranium enrichment will continue": Iranian FM ahead of nuclear talks with European powers
Iran has reaffirmed its right to continue uranium enrichment ahead of a key meeting in Istanbul with Britain, France, and Germany, where Tehran is expected to face warnings over potential nuclear sanctions . The talks, scheduled for Friday, will also include the European Union's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, and mark the first high-level meeting since Israel's mid-June strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites triggered a 12-day war, which ended in a ceasefire on June 24. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category "Especially after the recent war, it is important for them [European countries] to understand that the Islamic Republic of Iran's position remains unshakable, and that our uranium enrichment will continue," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Thursday, as quoted by the Tasnim news agency and reported by Al Jazeera. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Investire per il futuro? Inizia da qui eToro Click Here Undo Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said Tehran remains open to further dialogue with the United States but stressed that any renewed engagement depends on Washington taking meaningful steps to rebuild trust. "Rebuilding Iran's trust - as Iran has absolutely no trust in the United States," is one of "several key principles" for re-engagement, he said. "No room for hidden agendas such as military action, though Iran remains fully prepared for any scenario," Gharibabadi added, as reported by Al Jazeera. The 2015 nuclear agreement--signed by Iran, the E3 nations , China, Russia, and the US--placed limits on Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for phased sanctions relief. However, the US withdrew from the deal in 2018 under President Donald Trump and reimposed sanctions. Live Events While Britain, France, and Germany continued supporting the deal, they now accuse Tehran of violating its commitments and are considering reimposing sanctions under a clause expiring in October--an outcome Iran is keen to avoid. The International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA ) has confirmed that Iran is enriching uranium to 60 percent purity, far above the 3.67 percent cap under the 2015 accord. Weapons-grade uranium requires 90 percent enrichment. Western powers have long accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, an allegation Tehran denies, maintaining its nuclear programme is solely for civilian energy use, as reported by Al Jazeera.
