| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
|---|---|
| Case Title | Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta & Anr. vs. High Court of Gujarat & Ors. |
| Introduction | Writ petition focusing on the ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ principle in the promotion process. |
| Factual Background | Dispute over Rule 5(1) of the 2005 Rules and the April 2022 Recruitment Notice by the High Court of Gujarat. |
| Legal Issues | Interpretation of ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’; maintainability under Article 32 despite the alternative remedy under Article 226. |
| Applicable Law | Rule 5(1) of the 2005 Rules, Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, All India Judges’ Association case, Mohammed Ishaq v. S. Kazam Pasha. |
| Analysis | Detailed discussion on ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’, evaluation of ACRs, comparison with other jurisdictions’ practices. |
| Conclusion | Emphasis on a fair and transparent promotion process in line with statutory rules and the ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ principle. |
| Current Scenario | Reaffirmation of the ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ principle in Gujarat’s District Judge promotion process. |
CASE SUMMARY – The Supreme Court of India’s judgment in Writ Petition addresses the promotion of Civil Judges (Senior Division) to District Judges in Gujarat. It examines the interpretation of the ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ principle under Rule 5(1) of the 2005 Rules and a 2022 Recruitment Notice. The court evaluates the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 32, despite an alternative remedy under Article 226. It discusses the importance of fair promotions and the evaluation of candidates’ Annual Confidential Reports. The judgment emphasizes aligning promotion processes with statutory rules and the principle of ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’.
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
