Renil N vs The Registrar
2023 Latest Caselaw 1383 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 30TH POUSHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 26456 OF 2013
PETITIONER:

          RENIL N.
          S/O.SREEDHARAN, AGED 39 YEARS, ADVOCATE, GEETHANJALI
          HOUSE, P.O.PURAMERI, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673
          503.
          BY ADV SRI.R.SUDHISH


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE REGISTRAR, (RECRUITMENT & COMPUTERISATION)
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
    2     THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
    3     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
          GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695
          001.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.KRB.KAIMAL (SR.)
          B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

                                    2


                P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                 ------------------------------
              W.P.(C).No. 26456 of 2013
         ----------------------------------------------
      Dated this the 20th day of January, 2023


                          JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition is filed with the following

prayers:

i. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ

order or direction to the first and second respondents to

formulate a permanent scheme and guidelines for the

selection procedure to the post of the District judges

through Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examinations.

ii a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ

order or direction to the to first and second respondents to

report all existing vacancies of District Judges in the state

for direct appointment from the bar.

iii. to declare that the hon'ble judges of this Hon'ble

Court or other persons holding higher posts than the district

judges alone are competent to evaluate answer scripts in

Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examinations.

iv. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

order or direction to the first and second respondent that to

strictly follow the ratio in the appointment of District judges

by transfer and direct recruitment from bar as per the Rules

by taking into consideration all the post of the District

Judges including that of Motor accident Claim Tribunal,

Family Court Labour Court, Special Judges Court and various

Tribunals Excluding Fast Track Courts.

2. The main prayer in the writ petition is for

issuing appropriate direction to respondents 1 and 2 to

formulate a permanent scheme and guideline for the

selection procedure to the post of District Judges for

Kerala Higher Judicial Service Examination. A counter

affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2. It will be better

to extract the relevant portion of the counter affidavit:

7. The selection process with respect to the post

of District & Sessions Judge in the Kerala State Higher

Judicial Service is guided by Special Rules, the Scheme of

Examination and the Procedure for the Test prescribed for

the Kerala State Higher Judicial Service Examination. It is

true that the Scheme of Examination and the Procedure for

the Test were being modified in the previous selections. The

modifications were made for facilitation of the selection WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

process and to ensure sufficient number of talented

candidates in the merit list, taking into account the change

in circumstances. From 2007 selection onwards, there is

dearth of candidates in the merit list. This prompted the

respective Recruitment Committees to amend the Scheme

of Examination and Procedure for the Test so as to fill the

maximum number of vacancies from among the best

qualified hands.

8. In Siraj Vs. High Court of Kerala 2006(2) KLT 923

(SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that since the

High Court is the best Judge of what should be the proper

mode of selection, it is left to the High Court to follow such

procedure as it deems fit. The Hon'ble Court also observed

that it is clearly open for the High Courts to prescribe bench

marks for the written test and oral test in order to achieve

the purpose of getting the best available talent.

9. It is submitted that during the 2011 selection of

District & Sessions Judges, the answer paper valuation work

was conducted by the Hon'ble Judges of High Court of

Kerala and it took six months period to complete the

valuation. The main reason behind the delay in getting the

answer papers get valued was the hectic work schedule of

the Hon'ble Judges both on judicial and administrative

sides. As the valuation work was conducted by the Hon'ble

High Court Judges, a centralized valuation was not possible WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

without affecting their judicial work. During the 2012

selection of District Sessions Judges, the Recruitment

Committee had taken note of the delay occurred in the

previous selection and arrived at the conclusion that the

work of valuation of answer papers is undertaken by the

Hon'ble Judges of High Court, it would cause delay in

completing the work and therefore decided to conduct a

centralized valuation deploying senior Judicial Officers in

the cadre of District Judges. As per the Kerala State Higher

Judicial Service Rules, 1961 or the Scheme of the

Examination or the Procedure for the Test, there is no

provision stipulating that the answer papers are to be

valued only by the Hon'ble Judges of the High Court. The

allegations in the Writ Petition against the valuation

conducted by the District Judges are baseless and figments

of imagination by the petitioner and are only to be rejected.

10. The syllabus for written examination and cut

off marks for qualifying for interview are announced in

every notification and the pattern of questions is published

in the website well in advance and the examinations are

conducted accordingly. There cannot be a fixed syllabus, cut

off marks and pattern of questions for all the examinations

to come, since changes may be required to meet the

changing circumstances and the Recruitment Committee

will decide on the same prior to every selection. No WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

prejudice will be caused to the petitioner or any one on that

account.

From the above affidavit, it is clear that the

grievance of the petitioner is redressed. In the light of

the same no further order is necessary.

Recording the above counter affidavit this writ

petition is closed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

Raj 20.01.2023.

WP(C) NO.26456 OF 2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26456/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE 'THE HINDU' DAILY DATED 27.09.2013.