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

2005 Supreme(SC) 755

Supreme Court Of India
K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.
STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS - Appellants
Versus
RAKSH NIGAM - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2936 of 2005,
Decided on April 29, 2005

Headnote:

M.P. Education Service (Service Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1982 - Recruitment process - Withdrawal of advertisement - Effect of - Respondent selected for the post of Lecturer in Stenography and typing on the basis of 1982, Rules - As per said Rules postgraduate degree in stenography and typing was essential - Admittedly respondent did not possess the said degree -The advertisement had already been withdrawn-Contention that in the State of M.P. there was no post- graduate degree course or post-graduate degree available and therefore, Rules, 1982 were not applicable ,not accepted- Division Bench of the High Court held not justified in directing the appellant to consider the appointment of the respondent to the post of Lecturer in Stenography and Typing- Order of the High Court set aside. [Paras 3 and 4]

ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. The respondent applied for the post of Lecturer in stenography and e typing. The selection was made on the basis of the M.P. Education Service (Service Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1982. As per the Recruitment Rules for appointment to the post of Lecturer in stenography and typing in higher secondary schools the candidate should be a postgraduate in the respective subject. Admittedly, the respondent does not possess a postgraduate degree in stenography and typing. The contention urged by the respondent is that in the State of M.P. there is no postgraduate degree course or postgraduate degree available in anyone of the universities for stenography and typing and therefore, the Recruitment Rules, 1982 are not applicable for appointment to the post of Lecturer for stenography and typing. The respondent also contended that the Cabinet had taken a decision to relax these Rules for recruitment to appoint Lecturer in stenography and typing.

4. The counsel for the State points out that the Rules are still binding and no amendment has been carried out to make any relaxation. It has also been pointed out that the selection process by advertisement as regards the post of Lecturer in stenography and typing was already withdrawn by the State.

5. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that the Division Bench was not justified in directing the appellant herein to consider the appointment of the petitioner (the respondent herein) to the post of Lecturer in stenography and typing. We set aside the impugned judgment.

6. The appeal is allowed accordingly.

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 Back to top