- SFG FRC 2027 | Program starts from 19th Dec. 2026 | Admissions open for Entrance Test Click Here to know more →
- Prelims Test Series (PTS) for Prelims 2027 starts 11th Oct. 2026 Click Here to know more →
- [Pre-order] Ethics Redbook 3rd Edition: Delivery starts from 10th October onwards Click Here to Read More →
- 21 Sept. | GS Advance Program (GSAP) for UPSC 2027 Mains starts from 11th Oct. Click Here to Read More →
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
