 Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, Jun 19, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
 |
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
Fresh law graduates are eligible, even if they were not enrolled as advocates: notification Prescription against norms of judicial office, contrary to Supreme Court judgment: petitioner CHENNAI: Clarifying on the qualification prescribed in Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 2007, the Madras High Court has said an applicant for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) should be eligible to be enrolled and also enrolled as an advocate. In his writ petition, M. Radhakrishnan, a practising advocate, challenged a notification of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary dated January 19, 2007 prescribing that fresh law graduates were eligible, even if they were not enrolled as advocates, and a pursuant TNPSC advertisement. The petitioner submitted that a person who was eligible to be enrolled may also mean a person who had not applied for enrolment. The prescription went against the norms of judicial office and was contrary to a Supreme Court judgment. In its order, the First Bench, comprising the Chief Justice A.K. Ganguly and Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, said Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules 2007 had been framed by the government in consultation with the High Court. It was also of the opinion that an applicant for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) should not only be eligible for being enrolled but must apply for being enrolled. Disposing of the petition, the Bench clarified that the qualification prescribed, which read “Must be a fresh law graduate…who is eligible to be enrolled or enrolled as an advocate” should be read as “Must be a fresh law graduate… who is eligible to be enrolled and enrolled as an advocate.” It was constrained to read the word ‘or’ as meaning ‘and’ conjunctively and not disjunctively. The Judges said they were doing so in order to make it workable and make it consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision. They made it clear that the recruitment process may proceed as per the advertisement issued and as clarified by it.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|