Mayank Kumar Pandey v. Delhi High Court Through Registrar General

1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

“I. Pass an order directing respondent to extend the time for submission of applications and conduct of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination, 2026, as per the notification dated 01.07.26 issued by the Respondent (Annexed as Annexure P-1) in compliance with the time schedule fixed by the hon’ble supreme court in Malik Mazhar Sultan & Anr. V. U.P. Public Service Commission & Ors. (Civil appeal no. 1867 of 2006)(Annexed as Annexure P-2)

II. Pass an order for issuance of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash and set aside reply dated 14.07.26 sent by the respondent (Annexed as Annexure P-4) thereby rejecting the request made by the petitioner vide representation dated 07.07.26 (Annexed as Annexure P-3) without citing any reason and for any other direction

III. Pass any such direction or order that this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the above-mentioned case.”

2. The petitioner is seeking to set aside the reply of the respondent dated 14.07.2026 rejecting the representation of the petitioner dated 07.07.2026 wherein the petitioner had sought extension of time for submission of application for the Delhi Higher Judicial Services Examination, 2026.

3. Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing our attention to page 84 of the petition, states that the last date for submitting the application being 15.07.2026, the respondent could not have held the preliminary examination on 26.07.2026 that is after only eleven days from the last date of filing the application. In support of his submission, he has drawn our attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) v. U.P. Public Service Commission, (2008) 17 SCC 703, more specifically order dated 04.01.2007 wherein, the Supreme Court has prescribed schedule for the conducting judicial service examination.

4. According to him, as per the schedule fixed by the Supreme Court, atleast two months’ time has to be given to a candidate to prepare for an examination and hence, in that sense, the examination should have been held two months after the last date of submitting of the applications.

5. Mr. Mishra by drawing our attention to the aforesaid judgment also submits that the respondent is within its right to seek extension of time from the Supreme Court but could not have limited the period to prepare for the examination by only 11 days from the last date of filing the application.

6. We are not impressed by the said submission of Mr. Mishra in view of the fact that the Supreme Court in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) (supra) has also stated as under:- “Insofar as Delhi is concerned, it has been stated that entire selection process is conducted by the High Court and examination is held twice in a year for the Delhi Judicial Service. The High Court may, accordingly, amend the aforesaid time schedule so as to conduct the selection process twice in a year and the revised time schedule shall be placed on the record of this case. For the present, the Delhi High Court is permitted three months’ time for publication of final result after the written examination.”

7. Even otherwise, in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 2/2018 decided on 22.10.2018, the Supreme Court has in paragraph 4.[3] of the order has stated as under:- “4.3. Whether the time expected to be taken to complete the on-going process/processes can be shortened and the process/processes completed before the time-schedule spelt out in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3)¹ which time-schedule this Court would understand to be indicating the outer time-limit and not the minimum period for completion.”

8. From the perusal of the aforesaid paragraphs, it is clear that certain discretion is vested with the High Court to shorten the time for completing the process before the time schedule as stipulated in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) (supra).

9. It is necessary to note that the Supreme Court in the case of Rejanish K.V. v. K. Deepa and Ors., Civil Appeal No. 3947/2020 vide order dated 09.10.2025 directed amendment of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules,

1970. It is also a matter of record that pursuant thereto, the High Court of Delhi amended the Rules on 19.02.2026. It is thereafter that the present notification dated 01.07.2026 was issued wherein the schedule has been fixed for conducting the examination. We also note that the Supreme Court has clearly directed that the timelines are required to be strictly followed by High Courts while conducting the examinations.

10. We have been informed by Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that, around 1900 candidates (approximately) have applied for the examination and they all have been issued hall tickets for the preliminary examination on 26.07.2026. Since the candidates come from different parts of the country and the examination centres are in Delhi, it is very difficult for the respondent to change the date to a date as convenient for the petitioner. It is also her case that, no other candidates except the petitioner has sought extension of time beyond 26.07.2026.

11. At this stage, Ms. Kaul states that, in terms of the directions of the Supreme Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) (supra), the High Court is filing the status report on the conduct of the examination and filling up of the vacancies every year.