Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, R. BANUMATHI, JJ.
Amol - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7938 of 2010
Decided On : 07-11-2017
Mistake of Fact - Appointment under Wrong Category - The appellant applied for the post of Krishi Sevak in the Department of Agriculture, Government of Maharashtra. The appellant was offered appointment under the category of 'Scheduled Castes' based on a mistake of fact, as the last successful candidate in that category had secured higher marks. The court upheld the stand taken by the High Court on verification of records that the candidates were not otherwise eligible to be appointed in terms of their merit.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant applied for the post of Krishi Sevak in the Department of Agriculture, Government of Maharashtra. The appellant was offered appointment under the category of 'Scheduled Castes' based on a mistake of fact, as the last successful candidate in that category had secured higher marks.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the stand taken by the High Court on verification of records that the candidates were not otherwise eligible to be appointed in terms of their merit. The appointment already offered to them was on a mistake of fact, which has only been corrected on verification of the records.
Issues: The issues raised in the appeals were related to the eligibility of the candidates for appointment and the correction of the mistake of fact in the appointment process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the candidates were not otherwise eligible to be appointed in terms of their merit, and the appointment offered to them was on a mistake of fact, which was corrected on verification of the records.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and pending applications, if any, were disposed of. There were no orders as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
Kurian, J.
The appellant applied for the post of Krishi Sevak in the Department of Agriculture, Government of Maharashtra.
2. The Tribunal, on verification of the records found that the application was under the quota reserved for Ex-Servicemen. The appellant obtained only 46.25% marks. It appears that the appointment was offered to the appellant under the category of 'Scheduled Castes'. The appellant was offered appointment on the basis of application and on the basis of marks secured by him for the 'Ex-Serviceman' category.
3. The appellant took up a contention that his appointment is only under the 'Scheduled Castes' category. If it was in the Scheduled Castes category, the last successful candidate had secured 62.75% marks. Therefore, in any case the appellant was not entitled for appointment.
4. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent findings rendered by the Tribunal and the High Court.
5. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
6. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
7. There shall be no orders as to costs.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, R. BANUMATHI, JJ.
Shankar - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 7940, 7939, 7941, 7943 & 7942 of 2010
Decided On : 07-11-2017
JUDGMENT :
Kurian, J.
The issues raised in these appeals have been dealt with by this Court vide judgment dated 07.11.2017 rendered in Civil Appeal No.7938/2010 titled Amol v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., wherein this Court has upheld the stand taken by the High Court on verification of records that the candidates are not otherwise eligible to be appointed in terms of their merit. The appointment already offered to them was on a mistake of fact, which has only been corrected on verification of the records.
2. Therefore, we do not find any merit in these appeals. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.
3. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
4. There shall be no orders as to costs.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
