- 08 June | Sociology Optional Strategy Session with AIR 10 Ujjwal Priyank Click Here to register →
- 08 June | Geography Optional Strategy Session with AIR 39 Rohin Kumar Click Here to register →
- 09 June | Ethics+ Class #1 + Case Studies Workshop by Mr. Ayush Sinha | Click Here to register →
Source: The post is based on the article “Reservation policy need not be followed in appointment of law officers, rules Madras High Court” published in “The Hindu” on 8th December 2023
Why in the News?
The Madras High Court has ruled that the rule of reservation need not be followed in the appointment of law officers and merit should be the only criteria.
What was the case about before Madras High Court?
A petition was filed in the Madras High Court arguing that the Law Officers of the High Court of Madras (Appointment) Rules, 2017 for the appointment of law officers should be declared unfair due to the absence of reservation provisions.
The petitioner said that the rule of reservation must be applied even to contractual as well as temporary appointments
What was the court ruling on this?
1) The Madras High Court ruled that the rule of reservation need not be followed in the appointment of law officers and merit should be the only criteria.
2) Neither the law officers are appointed to a civil post nor are they employees of the government. As such, Article 16(4) of the Constitution will not be applicable.
– Note: Art 16(4) stipulates that the right to equality in public employment does not prevent the State from making reservations for any backward class of citizens which are not adequately represented.
3) The government is duty bound to engage only the most proficient, competent and capable lawyers to represent it before the courts of law.
UPSC Syllabus: Polity
