Published on: September 6, 2021, at 11:00 IST
The Supreme Court rejected a Special Level Petition (SLP) that criticized Allahabad High Court’s order dismissing a plea challenging Rule 18 of the U.P. Higher Judicial Services Rules, 1975.
The ground mentioned that it mandated only one minimum qualification (45% total) for all categories of competitors i.e. General, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe and so on and from there on nullified the whole point of eeservation.
Referring to Justice Shetty Commission, the plea had stated that “Rule 18 was ultra vires the constitutional provisions, owing to non-prescription of lower minimum qualification for Reserved category candidates.“
The Court Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli stated “Let someone else challenge it. Not at your behest. Dismissed.”
The Bench also observed that “What is this Samvidhan Bachao Trust, an NGO? We don’t want any busybodies challenging the Higher Judicial Services Rules. Let some aggrieved candidates come before us, we will hear them. We cannot have a PIL on this issue.”
The Special Leave Petition was filed by Samvidhan Bachao Trust through Senior Advocate Ashok Kumar Sharma.
An advertisement dated January 18, 2021 for direct recruitment to Uttar Pradesh High Judicial Service, 2020 was challenged and directions were sought for amendment of the rules in accordance with the recommendations of Justice Shetty Commission for recruitment to higher judicial services on the ground that existing provisions are arbitrary and unreasonable.
Click here to read/download the Order
Also Read: What is Judicial Misconduct?