Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) THE matter comes up on an application (39999/5 -9 -14) under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacation of the exparte ad interim order dated 28 -7 -2014. By the said order this court directed that status as existed as of that day with reference to Annexure -9 to the writ petition be maintained till the next date.
(2.) ANNEXURE -9 to writ petition is a letter a letter dated 15 -5 -2014 addressed by the District Magistrate, Sawai Madhopur to the Special Secretary, Legal Affairs department, Rajasthan forwarding a panel of five names, from amongst whom appointment to the post of Public Prosecutor in Sessions Courts at Sawai Madhopur was to be made. It has been argued by Mr. Hasan for the petitioner that the ex -parte ad -interim stay order dated 28 -7 -2014 is based upon a prima facie contravention of Sections 24(4) and 24(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter '1973 Act'), which read as under: - 24(4) The District Magistrate shall in consultation with the Sessions Judge, prepare a panel of names of persons, who are, in his opinion fit to be appointed as Public Prosecutors or Additional Public Prosecutors for the district. 24(5) No person shall be appointed by the State Government as the Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor for the district unless his name appears in the panel of names prepared by the District Magistrate under sub -section (4).
(3.) MR . Hasan submits that even though the petitioner was included in the panel of 12 Advocates forwarded by the District & Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur to the Collector and District Magistrate, Sawai Madhopur under Section 24(4) of the 1973 Act and placed at Serial No. 1 of the said list, yet the District Magistrate Sawai Madhopur has arbitrarily and illegally excluded the petitioner's name and not forwarded his name to the State Government for consideration for appointment as the Public Prosecutor for the Sessions Court at Sawai Madhopur. It has been submitted that the District Magistrate has confined his recommendation to only four of those in the panel of 12 forwarded by the District & Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur and even arbitrarily and illegally included one Surendra Prasad Gupta in the panel sent to State Government for the purpose of consideration for appointment of one Public Prosecutor in the criminal courts at Sawai Madhopur, even though the said Surendra Prasad Gupta was not recommended by the District & Sessions Judge Sawai Madhopur. This he submits is in the cross -hair of the judgment of this court in the case of Bhag Chand Paliwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others [1993(2) W.L.C. (Raj.) 747]. Reliance has also been placed on a judgment of the Division Bench of this court in the case of Manak Chand Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan & Another [ : 1991(1) RLR 218].;