The case arose from the cancellation of the advocate’s provisional appointment as a civil judge despite his selection in the Tamil Nadu Judicial Service recruitment conducted for the 2014-15 to 2016-17 vacancies.
The advocate had disclosed in his application that he had previously faced a criminal case in which he was acquitted.
After the provisional selection list was published and an appointment order issued, the Madras High Court undertook verification of the character and antecedents of selected candidates.
Following that exercise, the High Court found him unsuitable for appointment, prompting the Tamil Nadu government to cancel his provisional appointment in November 2022.
In February 2024, the Madras High Court dismissed his challenge, holding that provisional selection or even issuance of an appointment order did not create an indefeasible right to appointment.
The case arose from the cancellation of the advocate’s provisional appointment as a civil judge despite his selection in the Tamil Nadu Judicial Service recruitment conducted for the 2014-15 to 2016-17 vacancies.
The advocate had disclosed in his application that he had previously faced a criminal case in which he was acquitted. After the provisional selection list was published and an appointment order issued, the Madras High Court undertook verification of the character and antecedents of selected candidates.
Following that exercise, the High Court found him unsuitable for appointment, prompting the Tamil Nadu government to cancel his provisional appointment in November 2022.
In February 2024, the Madras High Court dismissed his challenge, holding that provisional selection or even issuance of an appointment order did not create an indefeasible right to appointment.
It ruled that the High Court was entitled to assess a candidate’s character, antecedents and overall suitability for judicial office, and that courts exercising judicial review could not ordinarily interfere with such an assessment unless it was shown to be illegal or mala fide.
This prompted the advocate to move the Supreme Court.
