SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 655

B.N.KIRPAL, S.RAJENDRA BABU
Union Public Service Commission – Appellant
Versus
Gaurav Dwivedi – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

2. The question involved is as to how many candidates should be called for interview/viva voce by the Union of Public Service Commission (for short the U.P.S.C.) for recruitment to the Central Services.

3. An advertisement was published by the U.P.S.C. which was to the effect that for the Central Services Examination to be conducted in 1988 the approximate number of vacancies would be 740. It was clearly stipulated therein that this figure of 740 was subject to alteration.

4. Preliminary examination was held in May 1998 and the result was declared in July 1998. Those who were successful, then took part in the main examination which was conducted in October/December 1998. The case of the appellant is that in March 1999, for the reasons stated in its affidavit in reply in the High Court to which we need not advert to at this stage, the number of vacancies were finally determined to be at a figure of 470. It is an admitted case that the number of candidates who are called for interview/ viva voce test are not more than twice the number of vacancies which are required to be filled. In view of this on 26th of Marc










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top