District Judge, the Court of the Civil Judge Class 1 and the Court of the Civil Judge Class II .
1 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ALAGIRISWAMI, J. In the Judicial Service of Madhya Pradesh there are three classes of officers, Civil Judges, Additional District and Sessions Judges and District Judges but under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1958 there are four classes of Civil Courts, the Court of the District Judge, the Court of the Addl.
Mr. N. Shroff appearing for the appellants has also shown us the file companytaining the proceedings of the Judges meetings of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh on the various dates above referred to in which the names of various officers for being Posted as Class I Civil Judges have been companysidered.
Appeal by certificate from the Judgment and order dated August 8, 1971 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in Misc.
The respondent No.
The High Court took the view that as for some years past a principle for selection had been introduced that before a Civil Judge was promoted to the post of an Additional District and Sessions Judge, it was essential that he should have exercised the powers of Civil Judge, Class 1, for a period, however short and that principle had a rational relation to the suitability of Civil Judges for promotion to posts of Additional District and Sessions Judges and the respondent No.
1, Shri B. A. Nigam, entered service as a Civil Judge on 20 10 1956 in Madhya Bharat.
624 of 1972.
After Madhya Bharat became part of Madhya Pradesh he was absorbed as a Civil Judge and placed for purposes of seniority at No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On or about May 3, 1968, by a resolution of the High Court it was laid down that selection of a Civil Judge, Class 11, as a Civil Judge, Class I, shall be deemed as promotion and that being so, only the cases of Civil Judges, Class 1, shall be companysidered for promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judges in order of their seniority.
November 6, 1967 and April 18, 1968 and on each of these occasions he was number found fit to exercise powers of a Civil Judge, Class 1.
1 companyld number legitimately companyplain, as he did number have that qualification, and he companyld number be, selected for promotion only on the basis of seniority.
537 of 1969.
Petition No.
The fitness of the respondent 1 for promotion as Civil Judge, Class I, seems to have been companysidered on a number of occasions i.e. on May 3, 1966, August 12, 1966, April 17, 1967.
From the time when the Madhya Pradesh Civil Court Act, 1958 came into force some period of service of a Civil Judge during which he exercised powers of Civil Judge, Class 1, however, small, was companysidered a necessary qualification for promotion to the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge.
They also took the view that since the respondent No.
N. Phadke, Anthoney G. Menezes, P. G. Bhartari, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur Ravinder Narain, for respondent No.
N. Shroff, for the Appellants.
1 had number acquired the qualification required for promotion, his claim for such promotion should be regarded as having been companysidered and rejected by implication till November 30, 1968 when he was allowed to exercise the powers of Civil Judge, Class I. Having held rightly, according to us, that till November 30, 1968 the respondent No.
1 was number qualified to be companysidered for promotion as an Additional District and Sessions Judge, the High Court curiously enough issued a writ of mandamus directing that the respondents claim for promotion should be companysidered in relation to the claims of his juniors and if he was found fit he should be allowed the companysequential benefits including fixing of seniority in the cadre of Additional District and Sessions Judges.
