SURINDER MOHAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of L.P. As. Nos. 1149 of 1988 and 1161 of 1988, as common questions of law and facts arise in these appeals.

(2.) THESE appeals are directed against the judgment of the learned Single judge whereby he had upheld the selection of Respondents Nos. 3 to 7 as Additional District and Sessions Judges in the State of Haryana. Reference to the facts and documents, unless otherwise specified, shall be made from L.P.A. No. 1161 of 1988.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground of laches and also on merits. The learned Single Judge held that the Selection Committee was competent to short -list the candidates by adopting a reasonable criterion for the purpose of inviting eligible candidates for interview It rightly decided that those candidates should be called for interview who had shown gross professional income for the last three years as Rs. 54,000/ - or more, On the second ground, the learned Single Judge held that although in the notification published in the Government Gazette, it was not mentioned that the applications of the practising Advocates in the districts shall be forwarded with the recommendation of the respective District and Sessions Judges, but in the endorsements on the notification, which is an integral part, it is specified that in the case of Advocates/Pleaders practising in the Sessions Divisions, their applications were to be forwarded by the respective District and Sessions Judges with their recommendations. The learned Single Judge farther held that in fact the District and Sessions Judges had circulated this notification with this endorsement to the members of the Bar in their respective districts. Thus, the learned Single Judge negatived the pleas of the writ -Petitioners.