NDLI: Deepak Aggarwal Vs. Keshav Kaushik and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Additional District Judge advocate pleader
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12 Referred Case 13
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	CONSTITUTION OF IND/A, 1950: Art. 233(2) - Appointment to the post of Additional District Judge through direct recruitment from Bar - Eligibility - Held: One of the essential requirements articulated by the expression "if he has been for not less than seven years an advocate" in Art. 233(2) is that such person must with requisite period be continuing as an advocate on the date of application. Art. 233(2) - Expression 'advocate or pleader' - Held: Refers to legal practitioner and, thus, it means a person who has a right to act and/or plead in court on behalf of his client - For the purposes of Art. 233(2) both a Public Prosecutor and' an Assistant Public Prosecutor are covered by the expression 'advocate'- Rendering of service as a Public Prosecutor or as Assistant Public Prosecutor is deemed to be practice as an advocate - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - ss. 2 (7) and 2(15) ...:. 'Government pleader' - 'Pleader' - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - ss. 2(4) (as applicable in State of Haryana) 24 and 25 - Public Prosecutor - Assistant Public Prosecutor - Bar Council of India Rules - rr. 43 and 49. Art. 233(2) - Appointment to the post of Additional District Judge through direct recruitment from Bar- Assistant District Attorney/Public Prosecutor/Deputy Advocate General -Eligibility - Held: Since private appellants did not cease to A be advocate while working as Assistint District Attorney/Public Prosecutor/Deputy Advocate General, the period during which they have been working as such has to be considered as the period practicing law - Thus, all of them have been advocates for not less than seven years and were enrolled as advocates and were continuing as advocates on the date of the application - They fulfilled the eligibility under Art. 233 (2) of the Constitution and r. 11 of the HSJS Rules on the date of application - Haryana Superior Judicial Service Rules, 2007 - rr. 5(ii) and 11. Art. 233 (2) - Expression "the service" occurring in Art. 233(2) means 'judicial service" - Other members of the service of Union or State are excluded because Art. 233 contemplates only two sources from which District Judges can be appointed: (i) judicial service; and (ii) the advocate/pleader or in other words from Bar.The five private appellants, while working as Assistant District Attorney/Public Prosecutor/Deputy Advocate General, were selected through direct recruitment to the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge in the Haryana Superior Judicial Service (HSJS). However, the High Court, in writ petition quashed their selection holding that they did not have the requisite criteria to qualify for the recruitment as contemplated in Art. 233 of the Constitution of India and that except appellant 'RM', the other appellants did not have requisite experience. In the instant appeals filed by the five candidates and the High Court on administrative side, the questions for consideration before the Court were: (i) What is meant by Advocate' or 'pleader' under Art. 233(2)"? (ii) Whether a District Attorney/Additional District Attorney/Public Prosecutor/Assistant Public Prosecutor/ Assistant Advocate General, who is full time employee of the Government and governed and regulated by the statutory rules of the State and is selected by direct recruitment through the Public Service Commission, is eligible for appointment to the post of District Judge under Article 233(2) of the Constitution?" (iii) "What is the meaning of the expression "the service" under Article 233(2) of the Constitution"?
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice R. M. Lodha
Neutral Citation	2013 INSC 44
Petitioner	Deepak Aggarwal
Respondent	Keshav Kaushik And Others
SCR	[2013] 1 S.C.R. 402
Judgement Date	2013-01-21
Case Number	561

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Deepak Aggarwal Vs. Keshav Kaushik and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Mohan Lal Aggarwal Vs. Atinder Mohan Khosla

Ramesh Chandra Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge and Others

Tej Bhan Madan Vs. Ii Additional District Judge and Others

Shayam Babu Vs. District Judge, Moradabad. & Others

Hari Chand Aggarwal Vs. Batala Engineering Co. Ltd.

Sushila Vs. Iind Additional District Judge, Banda and Ors.

Balram & Others Vs. The 3rd Additional District. Judge & Anr.

Smt. Bimla Devi Etc. Vs. 1st Additional District Judge and Others Etc.

Additional District and Sessions Judge `x` Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Deepak Aggarwal Vs. Keshav Kaushik and Others

Deepak Aggarwal Vs. Keshav Kaushik and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Mohan Lal Aggarwal Vs. Atinder Mohan Khosla

Ramesh Chandra Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge and Others

Tej Bhan Madan Vs. Ii Additional District Judge and Others

Shayam Babu Vs. District Judge, Moradabad. & Others

Hari Chand Aggarwal Vs. Batala Engineering Co. Ltd.

Sushila Vs. Iind Additional District Judge, Banda and Ors.

Balram & Others Vs. The 3rd Additional District. Judge & Anr.

Smt. Bimla Devi Etc. Vs. 1st Additional District Judge and Others Etc.

Additional District and Sessions Judge `x` Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Deepak Aggarwal Vs. Keshav Kaushik and Others