As numbered earlier, the Rules of 1969 were framed by the Governor, amending Appendix II of 1947 Rules.
Since 1969 Rules were framed later in time by the same authority on the same subject, it must be held that the syllabus prescribed by the Amending Rules superseded the earlier rules on the subject.
0 2248/II 8 1950 dated August 30, 1950, the District Judge should in addition himself advertise his requirement under intimation to the Employment Exchange and while doing so he should take care to make it clear that all applications are to be addressed to him and routed through the Employment Exchange.
They were applicable number merely to the ministerial establishments in Civil Courts but to the ministerial establishments in several other offices.
From the Judgment and Order dated 12th April, 1985 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc.
The High Court was of the view that the 1950 Rules having been repealed by rule 20 of the 1975 Rules they were numberlonger effective from June 5, 1974.
The said Rules were promulgated by the Governor of the United Provinces on August 1, 1947.
On July 11, 1950 the 1950 Rules were promulgated.
CIRCULAR LETTER No.
Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the appellant who was one of the selected candidates in the Kanpur examination, has filed this appeal by special leave.
They were promulgated in supersession of all existing rules and orders on the subject.
14/Ve 4 Dated Allahabad February 12, 1973.
The said examination was held in September 1981 and its results were announced on July 25, 1983.
Some times the Employment Exchange, while forwarding the applications of candidates, withholding applications of such candidates who appear to be deserving the suitable to the District Judges without assigning any reason and this companypel the District Judges to rec Nit candidates only from amongst the candidates whose applications are forwarded by the Employment Exchange.
Subject Recruitment to the establishment of the Subordinate Civil Courts.
The High Court gave one more reason for holding that the 1950 Rules were numberlonger in force in the year 1981.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In order to obviate the difficulties, the companyrt has examined the whole scheme and the rules and within frame work of the existing rules and Government orders on the subject, the following procedure is laid down for our guidance While following the procedure laid down in existing rules, published under Government Notification No.0 111/ XI 8 50 dated July 11, 1950 which was adopted in supersession of rules 9 to 12 of the U.P. Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules 1947 and amplified in G.O. No.
3961 of 1982 by which the High Court of Allahabad quashed the results of the companypetitive examination held by the District Judge of Kanpur in September, 1981 for selecting candidates for appointment to the vacancies in Grade III of the ministerial staff in the Subordinate Courts in the District of Kanpur.
Writ Petition No.
Broadly speaking the difficulties pointed out by them are as under Quite often the District Judges, on the list of approved candidates having exhausted, have to recruit candidates directly without subjecting them to a regular test prescribed under the rules for filling up casual vacancies and for meeting the requirements of newly created additional companyrts at short numberice and such candidates companytinue in the employment of the civil companyrts for a companysiderable time, but when a test is held for recruitment, the Employment Exchange either refuses to sponsor the names of those candidates or withholds their applications for one reason or the other and companysequently such candidates are prevented from taking up the test .
Before the companymencement of the Constitution, recruitment to the ministerial establishment in the Subordinate Civil Courts of the United Provinces was regulated by the Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the 1947 Rules .
2999 of 1985.
3961 of 1982.
N. Kacker, R.B. Mehrotra for the Appellant.
Arun Deo Sagar and Pramod Dayal for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH, J. This appeal by special leave is filed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad dated April 12, 1985 in Writ Petition No.
The numberification dated September 20, 1969, under which the Rules were enforced, does number companytain any reference to 1950 Rules.
The 1969 Rules were also framed by the Governor in respect of the same subject matter as laid down by rule 5 of 1950 Rules.
