Jammu, Nov 29: Jammu and Kashmir High Court today directed the state to keep the controversial order diverting the direct quota of lawyers into higher judiciary into promotional quota in abeyance till further orders.
 The interim directions were issued by Justice Hasnain Massodi of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Jammu Wing in a petition filed by a lawyer in Jammu. The Bar Association also joined as intervener in the petition.
 After hearing the counsels for the petitioner and the state, the court observed that Ist National Judicial Pay Commission in its report did not recommend diversion of the direct recruitment quota in the event none of the candidates appearing in one or two successive written examinations conducted for direct recruitment gets selected for the advertised posts.
 There is prima facie merit in the argument that the diversion of direct recruitment quota  in terms of section 5(1) (c)  proviso J&K Higher Judicial Services Rules 2009 on the face of it may offend section  109 Constitution of J&K and the rights  guaranteed under Articles 14 & 16  Constitution of India the court observed while holding that the constitutional validity of the Rule, in the circumstances, deserves to be examined in depth.
 Justice Massodi further observed that Rule 5(1) (c) proviso J&K Higher Judicial Services Rules 2009 - whereby the posts set apart for direct recruitment are to be filled up by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division) in the event suitable candidates are not available for direct recruitment under Rule 5(1) (c) and also not so available in the next sessions - shall remain in abeyance till further orders.
 “The respondents shall also accord consideration to extension in duration of the examination  as prescribed under Rule 8(i) (a)  having  due regard to the length of the question paper i.e. number of questions the examinees have to reply in the written examination”, it directed further.
 The petitioners, being the practising advocates and aspirants for the posts of district judges advertised vide advertisement notice No.501 dated August 1, 2011 required to be filled up by direct recruitment from advocates in terms of Jammu & Kashmir Higher Judicial Service, Rules 2009, have questioned validity of Rule 5(1)(c) proviso whereby posts reserved for the direct recruitment may be filled up by promotion  in case suitable candidates are not available for the direct recruitment.
 The petitioners also challenged the Rule 8 (ii) whereby only candidates in General Category who obtain 60 per cent or more marks and in Reserved Category who secure 50 per cent or more marks in the written examination are to be called for  viva-voce  test in the ratio of three candidates for one available vacancy.
 The petitioners’ claimed that the Rule 5(1) (c) proviso is in conflict with section 109 constitution of J&K and also offends Articles 14 and 16 Constitution of India.
 Pertinently the lawyers in Jammu region are up in arms against the move to divert the direct quota into promotional quota of judges. The lawyers in most of the courts in the region are abstaining from appearing in the cases as a mark of protest against the decision.

Lastupdate on : Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:30:00 Makkah time
Lastupdate on : Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:00:00 IST