Supreme Court Stays Kerala HC Judgment Which Set Aside Appointment Of A District Judge

first_imgNews UpdatesSupreme Court Stays Kerala HC Judgment Which Set Aside Appointment Of A District Judge LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK11 Jan 2021 5:38 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court has stayed a Kerala High Court judgment which set aside the appointment of a District Judge on the ground that, at the time of issuing the order of appointment, he was not a practising Advocate and was in judicial service, functioning as a Munsiff.The bench headed by the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde issued notice in a special leave petition filed by Rejanish KV against…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court has stayed a Kerala High Court judgment which set aside the appointment of a District Judge on the ground that, at the time of issuing the order of appointment, he was not a practising Advocate and was in judicial service, functioning as a Munsiff.The bench headed by the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde issued notice in a special leave petition filed by Rejanish KV against the High Court judgment.Rejanish KV was a practising lawyer having 7 years’ experience in the Bar when he submitted his application for the post of District Judge. He was also an applicant for selection to the post of Munsiff/Magistrate and while the selection process of District Judge was underway, he was appointed as a Munsiff-Magistrate on 28/12/2017. After he got appointment order to the post of District Judge, he was relieved from the Subordinate Judiciary on 21/8/2019 and he took charge as District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram on 24/8/2019. Another candidate [K. Deepa] filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging his appointment contending that he was not eligible to be appointed as District Judge since at the relevant time when he was appointed as a District Judge, he was not a practising Advocate and was in judicial service, functioning as a Munsiff. This writ petition was allowed by the Single Bench relying on a Supreme Court judgment in Dheeraj Mor v. High Court of Delhi in which it was held that an advocate who applies for the post of District Judge by way of direct recruitment should continue to be a practising Advocate until the date of appointment.Though it upheld the Single Bench judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court observed that several appointments of District Judges may have been made across the country based on the Rules applicable in the respective States which may, as in the case of the Kerala Rules be contrary to the declaration of law in Dheeraj Mor. It , therefore, granted certificate to file appeal before the Supreme Court observing that matter involves substantial question of law of general importance.Case: REJANISH K.V. vs. K. DEEPA [Civil Appeal No(s). 3947/2020] Click here to Read/Download OrderRead Order Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more