The Supreme Court disposed of appeals challenging the constitutional validity of the Telangana State Judicial Service Rules, 2023. While keeping all legal questions open, it granted a one-time exception, directing the High Court to declare results and appoint the qualified appellants without treating the order as a precedent, thereby resolving the immediate recruitment impasse.
Facts Of The Case:
The case originated from a recruitment process for District Judges in Telangana. The appellants, advocates, had applied in April 2023 under the then-existing rules. However, in June 2023, the state introduced new rules, the Telangana State Judicial Service Rules, 2023. A key provision, Rule 5(5.1)(a), restricted eligibility to advocates who had been practicing specifically in the High Court of Telangana or courts under its control for at least seven years. Consequently, the candidatures of the appellants, who were not practicing in Telangana, were rejected. They challenged this in the High Court, arguing the rule was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 233 of the Constitution. The High Court upheld the validity of the 2023 Rules and dismissed their petitions. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court. A separate writ petition was also filed concerning a similar eligibility issue for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division). The Supreme Court, after hearings, suggested a compromise. The High Court agreed, leading to a directive for the results to be declared and the qualified candidates to be appointed as a special, one-time measure without creating a legal precedent.
Procedural History:
The procedural history began with the petitioners filing writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court for the State of Telangana, challenging their disqualification from the District Judge recruitment process based on the newly introduced 2023 Rules. The High Court, via a common judgment dated December 27, 2023, dismissed these petitions, upholding the validity of the Rules. Subsequently, the aggrieved parties appealed to the Supreme Court through civil appeals and special leave petitions. The Supreme Court, after hearing arguments and reserving judgment, facilitated a compromise whereby the High Court agreed to a one-time appointment of the qualified candidates. Based on this, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeals and connected matters with specific directions for appointment, explicitly stating that the legal questions were left open and the order would not serve as a precedent.
READ ALSO:Supreme Court Upholds 25% Future Prospects, Awards Consortium to All Children in Accident Case
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court, while reserving its judgment on the constitutional challenges to the Telangana State Judicial Service Rules, 2023, made a pivotal observation that facilitated a resolution. The Court noted that the High Court, upon a suggestion from the bench, had no objection to declaring the results and appointing the qualified appellants and petitioners as a special, one-time measure. Crucially, the Court observed that this extraordinary relief was strictly confined to the facts of the instant case and explicitly directed that it should not be treated as a legal precedent for future recruitment disputes. By doing so, the Court pragmatically resolved the immediate impasse for the affected candidates while keeping all substantial questions of law regarding the validity of the restrictive eligibility rules open for future adjudication.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court disposed of the civil appeals, special leave petitions, and the connected writ petition by issuing a final judgment that granted a unique, one-time remedy. It directed the High Court of Telangana to declare the results of the appellants, petitioners, and intervenors for the 2023 District Judge recruitment and, upon verification, to appoint those found suitable. This directive was to be completed within two months. The Court explicitly clarified that this decision was a special exception confined to the circumstances of this specific case and must not be cited as a legal precedent. All substantive questions of law regarding the validity of the 2023 Rules were left open, and the appointed candidates were denied arrears of monetary benefits and were to be placed below already-appointed incumbents in seniority.
Case Details:
Case Title: USHA KIRAN KSHATRI AND ORS. ETC. vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. Citation: 2025 INSC 1169 Appeal Number: Civil Appeal Nos. 11018-11019 of 2024 Date of Judgement: September 26, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih
Download The Judgement Here