A PANDURANGA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal by Special Leave we are once again called upon to lay down the meaning and scope of Article 233 of the Constitution of INdia relating to the appointment of District Judges. This Article along with other Articles in Chapter VI of Part VI of the Constitution came up for consideration and was interpreted by this Court on several occasions in the past yet, a Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its judgment under appeal felt persuaded to take a wholly erroneous view as to the meaning of the Article and committed a serious error in the application of the principles of law settled by this Court to the facts of the instant case.

(2.) WE shall state the facts in a narrow compass shorn off unnecessary details. On 3-1-1972 the Government of Andhra Pradesh, respondent No. 1 was requested by the High Court, respondent No. 2, to take necessary steps "for filling up six vacancies by notifying six posts of District and Sessions Judges, Grade II for direct recruitment." By a D. O. letter dated 14-9-1972 the first respondent informed the second respondent that the six vacancies were being notified for direct recruitment. They were actually notified in the Gazette of that date. With the approval of the High Court, an advertisement was published on 1-8-1972 in the Deccan Chronicle. The total number of applications received in response to the advertisement was 381. Twenty six applications were found to be not in order and rejected. The remaining 355 candidates were called by the High Court for interview by the Selection Committee of the High Court on various dates. Shri A. Panduranga Rao, the sole appellant in this Appeal was one of the candidates interviewed on 14-6-1973.

(3.) WE now come to the relevant letters in question. A. D. D. letter dated 26-7-1973 was written by the Government to the High Court with reference to the latter's letter of recommendation dated 13-7-1973. WE may point out here that this letter dated 26-7-1973 was written by the Government without any reference to, and in all probability, before the receipt of the High Court's letter dated 26-7-l973 in reply to the Government's of 24-7-1973. In the Government's letter dated 26-7-1973 attention of the High Court was invited to Instruction 12(5) of the Secretariat instructions and a request was made "to send the list of persons whom the High Court considered to have reasonable claims to the appointment or suitable for the posts of District and Sessions Judge, Grade II along with remarks regarding the qualifications and claims of the several persons in the list". It may be stated here that as usual the correspondence was going on between the Chief Secretary on behalf of the Government and the Registrar on behalf of the High Court. The latter in reply to former's letter dated 26-7-1973 sent the following reply on 1-8-1973: