Sri. Master RKGMM Mahaswamiji
Principal District & Sessions Judge – (PETITIONER)
The Registrar General,
Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka & Ors. (RESPONDENTS)
A two judge bench of Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose.
A scheduled to hear a plea by a principal district and sessions judge for quashing the Presidential order of April 30, appointing a “junior judge” as additional judge of the Karnataka High Court.Which is scheduled to take hearing at 10 am, just 30 min before the junior judge is sworn is s the additional judge of karnataka high court.Also with four judicial officers.
The writ petition filed advocate sanjay M Nuli, the principal district and sessions juges Sri Master RKGMM Mahaswaiji the order passed to promote Padmaraj Nemachandra Desai from district judiciary as additional judge of the high court for a period of 2 years “arbitrary, unconstitutional and unlawful “.
The name of the Petitioner was also ignored and not taken into consideration for promotion along with his batch mates although the consideration of functional promotion as District Judge (Super time scale) was pending and his service record his appointment as District Judge i.e., 25.02.2008 to December, 2018 is clear from any adverse remarks.
On April 30, the Law Ministry issued the notification, appointing judicial officers Shivashankar Amarannavar, Smt M Ganeshaiah Uma, Vedavyasachar Srishananda, Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, and Padmaraj Nemachandra Desai as additional judges for a period of two years.
The petitioner claims that apart from Padmaraj Nemachandra Desai, the four other officers who were elevated, are either batch mates or senior to the petitioner.
It is a case of superseding passing over of a senior District judge (who was appointed on 25.02.2008 under reserve category i.e. Schedule caste) by junior district judge and recommendation of Padmaraj Desai by the Hon’ble collegium of Karnataka High Court is unlawful, arbitrary, and in clear violation of statutory rules administrative instructions contained in the official memorandum dated 09.10.1985 and involved bias of malajide and it is clearly violated the functional rights guaranteed to the Petitioner under Articles 14 and 16 of the Indian Constitution.
By Muskan chauhan of Law college, Dehradun