Gujarat High Court Promotion Process Challenged: Supreme Court’s Landmark Verdict

The case of Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta & Anr. vs. High Court of Gujarat & Ors. arose from a dispute regarding the promotion process followed by the High Court of Gujarat for selecting District Judges under the Gujarat State Judicial Service Rules, 2005. The petitioners, two judicial officers, alleged that the High Court incorrectly applied the principle of ‘Seniority-cum-Merit’ instead of the mandated ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ for promotions.

Background of the Case

The High Court of Gujarat issued a recruitment notice on April 12, 2022, for 68 vacancies in the District Judge cadre under the 65% promotion quota. The process was based on the principle of ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ and required candidates to pass a Suitability Test. The assessment comprised four components:

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-tax-audit-cap-for-chartered-accountants-a-landmark-judgment-on-professional-regulation/

• Written Test (Objective Type – MCQs) – 100 Marks
• Evaluation of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) – 20 Marks
• Assessment of Average Disposal of Cases – 20 Marks
• Evaluation of Judgments Delivered – 60 Marks

The final Select List for promotion was prepared based on seniority among the candidates who met the minimum qualifying marks criteria.

Petitioner’s Argument

The petitioners contended that the High Court had effectively applied ‘Seniority-cum-Merit’ instead of ‘Merit-cum-Seniority.’ They argued:

• All eligible candidates underwent a minimum merit assessment, but promotions were granted strictly based on seniority.
• ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ means that merit should be the primary factor, with seniority considered only when merit is equal.
• Senior candidates were promoted even if they scored lower than some juniors in the Suitability Test.

Respondent’s Argument

The Gujarat High Court defended its promotion process, stating:

• ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ does not mean promotions should be solely based on merit.
• The process ensured that only those meeting the merit threshold were considered for promotion.
• The selection method had been consistently followed since 2011.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s selection process, clarifying:

• ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ does not require a competitive ranking system.
• The Suitability Test ensured that all selected candidates met a minimum merit threshold.
• Once a candidate cleared the merit threshold, seniority was the determining factor.
• The process aligned with the precedent set in All India Judges’ Association (3).

The Court rejected the petition, affirming that the promotion process followed by the Gujarat High Court was lawful and consistent with judicial service rules.

Conclusion

This ruling reaffirms the interpretation of ‘Merit-cum-Seniority’ in judicial promotions and upholds the importance of maintaining a balance between merit-based assessments and seniority considerations.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-compulsory-retirement-in-crpf-disciplinary-case/

Petitioner Name: Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta & Anr..
Respondent Name: High Court of Gujarat & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice Manoj Misra.
Place Of Incident: Gujarat.
Judgment Date: 17-05-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: ravikumar-dhansukhla-vs-high-court-of-gujara-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-17-05-2024.pdf