# extent that it shall not apply to the recruitments in the Subordinate Courts

- **Citation:** C.L. No.6/Ve-4/
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1996-02-20
- **Case number:** C.L. No.6/Ve-4/
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/extent-that-it-shall-not-apply-to-the-recruitments-in-the-subordinate-courts-162267
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

182
said G.O. has been relaxed by the Government, vide G.O. on the above subject, to the
extent that it shall not apply to the recruitments in the Subordinate Courts.
I am, therefore, to say that the directions issued in the aforesaid circular letter may
be read in the light of the position clarified by the Government as above and now all
recruitments and appointments may be made as usual, strictly according to Rules, giving
due representation to all the reserved categories.
C.L. No.6/Ve-4/ Admn. (D) dated 20th February, 1996
Directions in respect of posts falling under Rule 12 of the U.P. Subordinate Civil Court
Inferior Establishment Rules, 1955.
In compliance of the direction given in the Judgment dated 23.1.96 petition No.
5857 of 1994 Ram Babu and others vs. District Judge, Banda* (* For perusal Judgment,
See: 1996 AWC 516 (All) Extracts of the Judgement are reproduced) connected with
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5913 of 1994 Ran Das Pal v. District Judge, Banda, I am
sending herewith a copy of the same for information and necessary compliance in future.
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5857 of 1994 Ram Babu v. District Judge, Banda
Connected with
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5913 of 1994 Ram Das Pal v. District Judge, Banda,
1996 A W C 516 (All)
Hon‟ble S.P. Srivastava, J.

In this case, the Hon‟ble High Court made the following observations:-
"The waiting list contemplated under rule 12 of the Rules has to be of a
reasonable proportion qua the number of vacancies actually notified and it will
not be reasonable to hold that the vacancies which are notified may be of any year
beyond the year succeeding to the year of recruitment. A situation ought not to be
created where an anticipated vacancy likely to occur beyond the year succeeding
the year of recruitment is filled up on the basis of a list maintained under rule 32
of the Rules which vacancy is neither notified nor ought to be notified for
preparing such list in any year of recruitment. It further seems to me that
considering the context, there can be no escape from the conclusion that any other
interpretation to the expression „reasonable dimension‟ will render the rule 12 of
the Rules constitutionally invalid and a constitutionally invalid provision cannot
be saved by being put into an otherwise valid statute. An interpretation of a
statutory provision must lean in favor of upholding the statutory provision as far
as possible. In the circumstances, there can be no escape from the conclusion that
the waiting list contemplated under Rule 12 must be deemed to have lapsed on the
filling up of the notified vacancies whether existing or likely to become available
for being filled up in the year of recruitment or the succeeding year thereto and
should not and cannot be deemed to be subsisting so as to cover the vacancies
likely to become available during an indefinite period, subsequent thereto. It is not
permissible for the District Judge to prepare a waiting list taking into
consideration such vacancies which are likely to occur beyond the year
succeeding the year of recruitment so as to block the entertainment of applications
for appointment against anticipated vacancies likely to occur beyond the
succeeding year of the year of recruitment without any specification as such an
action will be against the constitutional mandate noticed herein above.
183
"The mere fact that the rule provides for the revision of the list from time to
time does not and cannot indicate that the list will be deemed to be subsisting till
exhausted as this revision becomes necessary as the list has to be utilised for filling
up temporary or officiating vacancies as well during the currency of the list as
indicated herein above."
The Hon‟ble High Court has issued the direction "requiring the District Judge to
ensure that:
(a)
all the available substantive vacancies in the posts covered by rule 12 of
the Rules or such vacancies which are likely to become available in the
year of recruitment and the year succeeding to it be notified inviting
applications before the preparation of the waiting list contemplated
therein.
(b)
the waiting list indicated above shall consist of the names of the
candidates in the proportion of 1:3 qua the notified number of vacancies;
(c)
the waiting list shall cease to be operative and stand exhausted on the
filling up of the last notified vacancy;
(d)
the fresh waiting list shall invariably be prepared before the accrual of the
vacancies so that there may not be any unnecessary delay its being filled
up.
(e)
all the existing „waiting lists‟ prepared under rule 12 of the Rules which
have served their purpose as indicated herein above shall cease to be
operative forthwith. The appointments already made shall, however,
remain undisturbed."
(vii)
Filling up of posts requiring particular skill by persons having that skill
C.L. No. 65/2007; Admin. (D): Dated 13.12.2007
It has been noticed by the Hon‟ble Court that in the Subordinate courts on various
posts such as accountant, amin, librarian etc. particular kind of skill related to that
discipline is required to be possessed by the incumbent to ensure flawless and smooth
functioning of the judgeship. Therefore the Hon‟ble Court desires that while appointing
persons on these posts the District Judge must give special preference to the persons
having proficiency in these areas.

Therefore you are requested to kindly ensure that in your judgeship, on the
occasion of any appointment having to be made on these posts such as librarian, amin and
accountant, special preference is given to such persons who have proficiency in the
concerned discipline such accountancy, survey and library science etc.

I am, further to add that kindly ensure compliance of the above direction in right
earnest.
[6]
REGULARISATION
(i)
Of Ad-hoc employees
C.L. No. 29/Ve-4/Admn. (D) dated 5th May, 1985
The District Judges are requested to dispose of the pending matters of
regularization of Adhoc appointees in accordance with the law laid down by a Division
Bench of Allahabad High Court in Writ petition No. 12075/1984 U.P. Civil Court‟s
Ministerial Service Association through its General Secretary, Lucknow vs. State of U.P.