Court Managers appointed on temporary basis in High Court should be regularised: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that court managers appointed on temporary basis to the High Court must be regularised and no discrimination can be made between court managers in District Courts and the High Court in this regard [Vidya Gopan v High Court of Kerala and others]..The division bench of Justice SV Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji said that even though the Supreme Court had directed the State governments to regularise the court managers employed temporarily in district judiciary, the said benefit cannot be denied to such temporary appointees in High Court..“Merely because the notifications of the District Judiciary for Court Managers of District Courts as well as this Court were different, it cannot be said that the selection to the District Court was different and selection to the High Court was under Article 229 of the Constitution of India. When the selection is through the same procedure, there cannot be a discrimination between the Court Managers appointed in this Court as well as in the District Courts.”The Court, therefore, set aside a single-judge order that had held that the apex court order was specifically for the regularisation of court managers in the District Courts and not the High Court where the appointments were made by the Chief Justice under Article 229..The division bench also noted that pursuant to the apex court judgment, many High Courts had regularised the services of court managers in their respective States irrespective of which court they were working."Moreover, a few of the High Courts in India have understood the order of the Apex Court to be applied for all the Court Managers irrespective of whether they are working in the District Court or in the High Court and consequently the Court Managers working in different High Courts were also regularised as a one time measure," the High Court said..The Court was considering an appeal challenging a single-judge order that held that the apex court order was specifically for the regularisation of Court Managers in District Courts.By way of background, the petitioners were appointed on a temporary basis to the post of court managers in Kerala High Court. They were given an extension to continue as court managers until the filling up of permanent seats. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court passed an order on August 2, 2018 directing the court managers in districts should be regularised by the State government since their assistance is needed for a proper administrative set up in a court.“The services of any person already working as a Court Manager in any district should be regularised by the State Government as we are of the considered view that their assistance is needed for a proper administrative set up in a Court.”Pursuant to the order of the top court, the Additional Chief Secretary of Kerala regularised the services of court managers of District Courts but not the High Court.The petitioners submitted a representation to Chief Justice for their one-time absorption which was rejected by the Rules Committee formed according to High Court Rules and High Court Service Rules. The Committee further decided to go with fresh recruitment for the post..The petitioners then approached the Supreme Court which granted them liberty to challenge the decision of the Administrative Committee in accordance with the law.The statement filed on behalf of the Kerala High Court contended that the appellants were appointed on a contractual basis and they are not entitled to any other right, privilege or preferential claim for appointment or re-appointment to any service, any claim for pension, or any sort of benefit by virtue of their appointment under the said agreement.The reply affidavit filed by the petitioners contended that the court managers in the High Court and the District Courts were appointed through a common selection process, indicating that the nature of their responsibilities and duties were similar in nature.However, the single-judge held that the Supreme Court judgment was specifically for court managers of District Court.The division bench, however, set aside the same and decided in favor of the petitioners. "Though order of the Apex Court was in respect of the court managers of district judiciary, the same yardstick can be applied in the case of court managers of High Court also, since all the court managers were selected through a common selection procedure, by way of an interview," the division bench ruled.The petitioners were represented by advocates S Ajith and K Parameshwar. The respondents were represented by advocates Elvin Peter PJ, Ganesh, Suvin R Menon and Manoj Kumar..[Read Judgment]