Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Friday, January 10, 2025

SC Allows Law Graduates Not Fulfilling 3-Year Practice Requirement Or 70% In LLB To Participate In Madhya Pradesh Civil Judge Exam

Posted in: Judiciary
Sat, Dec 16, 23, 20:10, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 9967
Monika Yadav vs High Court of Madhya Pradesh has provisionally permitted all the law graduates from appearing in the exam who were earlier barred for not meeting the mandatory requisite of three of advocacy practice and so also specifically those law graduates

While batting most strongly in favour of parity between the law graduates and not at all favouring the blind, brutal and blatant discrimination on the basis of 3-year practice or 70% in LLB which makes practically just no sense at all, we saw how none other than the Supreme Court itself in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Monika Yadav & Ors. vs High Court of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. in Writ Petition (C) No. 1380 of 2023 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1398 of 2023 in the exercise of its civil original jurisdiction that was pronounced as recently as on December 15, 2023 has provisionally permitted all the law graduates from appearing in the exam who were earlier barred for not meeting the mandatory requisite of three of advocacy practice and so also specifically those law graduates who fell short of achieving the minimum aggregate of 70% marks in their LLB examination to partake in the Civil Judge, Junior Division (Entry Level) Recruitment Examination – 2022 who possess the eligibility as per the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, as stood prior to the date of amendment i.e. 23.06.2023, without insisting to have the amended qualification specified in Rule 7(g) and the proviso thereto of the Amended Rules.

We thus see that the top court did not favour the latest amendment made this year only in Madhya Pradesh and has thus once again most laudably placed all the law graduates on the same footing as that of others just like it was the case earlier. It must be definitely asked: When we don’t see any such discrimination of the worst kind perpetrated even in the toughest of exams like the most prestigious Civil Services exams which has earned the unique distinction of being the toughest exams to crack that no one is barred just on the sole criteria of percentage alone then why should such discriminatory trend be allowed to take deep roots in the judiciary?

It must be definitely mentioned here that the Bench of Apex Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice JK Maheshwari and Hon’ble Mr Justice KV Viswanathan were dealing with a Special Leave Petition challenging the vires of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994. We must also note here that Rule 7(g) mandated a prerequisite of 3 years of practice as an advocate for law graduates who did not achieve a minimum aggregate of 70% marks in their LLB examination as a condition for eligibility in recruitment to the subordinate judiciary as Civil Judges.

We must certainly note here that while senior Supreme Court lawyers SK Gangele and so also Raju Ramachandran appeared for the petitioners challenging the mandatory requirement that had been inserted, we saw how similarly another senior Supreme Court Advocate and former Chief Justice of Orissa High Court – Dr S Muralidhar appeared for the High Court of Madhya Pradesh while the Additional Advocate General – Saurabh Mishra appeared for the State.

It must be also apprised here that the Madhya Pradesh High Court on December 15 had informed the Apex Court that all the candidates will be now allowed to appear for the Civil Judge Junior Division (Entry Level) Recruitment Exam 2023 regardless of having a minimum of 3 years of practice at the Bar after enrollment or 70% marks in the LLB exams. We must also note that the senior Apex Court advocate – Dr S Muralidhar while appearing on behalf of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on instructions submitted before the Bench that the High Court shall allow all the candidates to participate for Civil Judge, Jr. Division (Entry Level) Recruitment Examination – 2022 in furtherance to the Advertisement dated 17.11.2023 who possess the eligibility as per the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 as stood prior to the date of amendment i.e. 23.06.2023.

It must be also noted that the Apex Court in this notable judgment had observed that:
Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw these Writ Petitions with liberty to approach the High Court to challenge the vires of Rule 7(g) of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994. The prayer made is not opposed by the other side and seems reasonable. Therefore the Writ Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

SLP (C) No. 27337 of 2023

It would be pertinent to note that the Apex Court Bench after hearing all the sides observes that:
We have heard Sh. N. K. Mody, Sh. S. K. Gangele and Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Saurabh Mishra, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State as well as Dr. S. Murlidhar, learned senior counsel and Mr. Arjun Garg, learned counsel appearing for the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.

Further, the Bench then hastens to add in the next para of this brilliant judgment that:
Yesterday i.e. on 14.12.2023, we have issued notice to the State Government as well as to the High Court, requesting the Registrar General to represent in the case. Today, Dr. S. Murlidhar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the High Court, on instructions, has stated that the High Court shall allow all the candidates to participate for Civil Judge, Jr. Division (Entry Level) Recruitment Examination – 2022 in furtherance to the Advertisement dated 17.11.2023, who possess the eligibility as per the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, as stood prior to the date of amendment i.e. 23.06.2023, without insisting to have the amended qualification specified in Rule 7(g) and the proviso thereto of the Amended Rules.

Going forward, the Apex Court Bench then also adds further in the next para of this remarkable judgment that:
It is also stated by him that the order passed by this Court shall be uploaded on the website of the Madhya Pradesh High Court and, if necessary, a corrigendum be issued and shall be widely publicized today itself in the daily newspapers, thereby the candidates may not lose their chance to apply online prior to the last date of submission of Application Forms i.e. 18.12.2023.

Most significantly and most laudably, the Apex Court Bench then goes on to mandate in the next para of this most commendable judgment holding that:
In view of the statement made by learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the High Court, we provisionally permit all the candidates to fill up the Application Forms (including those who have not approached the court) and provisionally permit to participate in the Preliminary and written examination, subject to outcome of the challenge to the vires of Rules before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.

What’s more, the Apex Court Bench then also further envisages in the next para of this courageous judgment that:
Learned senior counsel further submits that the case shall be heard by the High Court and disposed of in the Judicial Side, as far as possible by the end of February, 2024.

In addition, the Apex Court Bench then further points out in the next para of this robust judgment that:
The above statement made by learned senior counsel is taken on record. In terms of the said statement, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.

Finally, we then see that the Apex Court Bench concludes by holding in the final para of this brief judgment that:
Pending interlocutory application(s),if any, is/are disposed of.

All said and done, we must note here that while the last date to apply for the Madhya Pradesh Civil Judge exam is December 18, 2023 and we witnessed how earlier the Madhya Pradesh High Court had refused to grant a provisional leave to the petitioners to participate in the examinations due on January 14, 2024. As an inevitable fallout, we then also naturally witnessed how following that a Special Leave Petition was filed in the Supreme Court. We then saw that writ petitions were also filed challenging the amendments. Ultimately, we see that the Apex Court has ruled most rationally in favour of the petitioners and has most commendably also allowed the law graduates who did not approach the Apex Court to appear in the exam of the Civil Judge Junior Division (Entry Level) Recruitment Examination in Madhya Pradesh irrespective of fulfilling the criteria of 3-year practice or 70% in LLB that was made which makes practically just no sense at all. Of course, this has certainly come as a big respite for those law graduates who did not fulfill the criteria of 3-year practice or could not secure 70% marks or above in LLB exams and this is the real beauty of this most exceptional judgment that makes it so special having a direct bearing on the lives of lakhs of law graduates for which the Apex Court Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice JK Maheshwari and Hon’ble Mr Justice KV Viswanathan deserves to be truly applauded and worth remembering for many years to come! No denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top