Anushka Mansharamani
The Apex Court declined to stay the changes in the rules related to making the practice of 3 years compulsory for an advocate before appearing as a Civil Judge in the State.
A vacation bench comprising Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Aniruddha Bose notified the High Courts and the Andhra Pradesh government about the writ petition filed by Regalagadda Venkatesh.
This petition sought a direction to allow the submission of his application stating that there was a time law was the last option.
To this, the vacation bench replied that “fortunately, the law has become one of the most competitive subjects of late.”
Senior advocate N K Mody, representing the petitioner sought a stay on the notification passed on 3rd December wherein applications were invited from the appointment of the post of a Civil Judge in the Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service.
Senior advocate N K Mody challenged the validity of Rule 5(2)(a)(i) of Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service Rules, 2007 stating that the 3 years practice rule infringes Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
He further cited the judgement passed by the Apex Court in ‘All India Judges Association’ where the Supreme Court had quashed the recommendation made by the Shetty Commission for 3 years of practice being the eligibility criteria.
He also sought a stay on the notification of the submission of applications as it was 2nd January.
The court did not observe any urgency in the petition for it to be entertained by the vacation bench.
Thereby the court listed the matter for consideration on 5th January.