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

2021 Supreme(SC) 102

L. NAGESWARA RAO, INDIRA BANERJEE
Anmol Kumar Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the parties : Mr. R.Venkataramani, Sr.Adv. Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, AOR Mr. Abhishek Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv. Ms. Vani Vyas, Adv. Ms. Sujata Muni, Adv. Mr. Deepak Nargolkar Sr.Adv. Ms. Prerna Singh. Adv. Ms. Kripa Shankar Prasad, AOR Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr.Adv. Ms. Ritu Rajkumari, Adv. Mr. Chandan Kumar, AOR Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv. Mr. Rituraj Choudhary, Adv. Ms. Sujata Muni, Adv. Ms. Vani Vyas, Adv. Mr. Surendra Singh Rana Adv. Mr. Ikshit Singhal Adv. Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Adv. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Adv. Mr. Maneesh Saxena, Adv Mr. Anbarasan Nathar Paul Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Chaturvedi Adv. Mr. Mohit Kaushik Adv. Ms. Bhanu Priya Sharma Adv. For M/s Mukesh Kumar Singh & Co. AOR Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AAG Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Bhaswati Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Parijat Kishore, AOR Mr. Raj Kishor Choudhary, AOR Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Anupam Bhati, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Ram Nath, Adv. Ms. Malvika Raghavan, Adv. Ms. Sheeba Fakhruddin Adil, Adv. Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Shantanu Jugtawat, Adv Mr. Prashant Agarwal, Adv Ms. Amita, Adv Ms. Vani Vyas, Adv Mr. Ravi Chandra Prakash, Adv Mr. Arvind Gupta, AOR Mr. Akshat Srivastava, AOR Mr. Kumar Shivam, Adv. Mr. Vatsalya Vigya, AOR Mr. Mayank Sapare, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar Sahu, Adv. Mr. Pran Krishna Jana, Adv. Mr. Vipin Kumar, Adv. Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv.

JUDGMENT

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

1. An advertisement was issued calling for applications for appointment to 384 posts of Police Sub-Inspectors, Attendants (Sergeant) and Company Commanders by the Home Department of the Government of Jharkhand on 01.03.2008. 1217 candidates were declared successful in the written examination and were called for interview. The final result was published and 382 candidates were selected against 384 vacancies as candidates belonging to SC Quota for the two posts of Sergeant were not available. A HighLevel Committee was constituted by the State Government to examine the irregularities in the selection process. A report was submitted by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Personnel), State of Jharkhand in which it was found that the select list was prepared wrongly by ignoring merit of candidates and by giving undue importance to the preferences given by them. Unsuccessful candidates filed Writ Petitions in the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi. During the pendency of the Writ Petitions, the appointments of 42 candidates made on the basis of the original select list were cancelled. 43 persons were appointed on the basis of the revised select list that was


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