1986 (3) TMI 329 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the competitive examination held by the District Judge of Kanpur in 1981.
2. Applicability and supersession of the 1947 Rules by the 1950 Rules.
3. Effect of the 1969 Amending Rules on the 1947 Rules.
4. Applicability of the 1975 Rules to the ministerial staff of the Subordinate Courts.
5. Relief granted to the petitioner by the High Court.

Summary of Judgment:

1. Validity of the Competitive Examination Held by the District Judge of Kanpur in 1981:
The appeal was filed against the High Court of Allahabad's decision to quash the results of the 1981 competitive examination for Grade III ministerial staff in Kanpur. The Supreme Court found that the examination was held in accordance with the 1950 Rules, which were still in force, and not the 1947 Rules as amended by the 1969 Amending Rules.

2. Applicability and Supersession of the 1947 Rules by the 1950 Rules:
The 1947 Rules regulated recruitment to the ministerial establishment in Subordinate Civil Courts. The 1950 Rules, promulgated by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, superseded the 1947 Rules concerning the subjects prescribed for the test and the manner of examination. The Supreme Court affirmed that the 1950 Rules superseded rules 9 to 12 and Appendix II of the 1947 Rules.

3. Effect of the 1969 Amending Rules on the 1947 Rules:
The 1969 Amending Rules amended rule 5 and Appendix II of the 1947 Rules. However, the Supreme Court noted that the 1969 Amending Rules did not reintroduce rule 11 of the 1947 Rules, which had been superseded by the 1950 Rules. Therefore, the reintroduction of Appendix II without rule 11 was ineffective, and the 1950 Rules continued to apply.

4. Applicability of the 1975 Rules to the Ministerial Staff of the Subordinate Courts:
The 1975 Rules, promulgated in supersession of all existing rules, did not apply to the Subordinate Courts under the control and superintendence of the High Court. Rule 20 of the 1975 Rules repealed the 1950 Rules, but since the 1975 Rules did not cover Subordinate Courts, the 1950 Rules remained applicable to them.

5. Relief Granted to the Petitioner by the High Court:
The High Court quashed the 1981 examination results and directed a fresh examination. The Supreme Court disagreed, noting that the petitioner had appeared in the examination without protest and filed the petition only after failing. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, reinstating the results of the 1981 examination and directing the appointment of successful candidates without back pay for the period they did not work.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and directed the appointment of successful candidates from the 1981 examination in Kanpur. The Court also suggested that the High Court may promulgate a fresh set of recruitment rules for the staff in the Subordinate Courts.