Back
G. NARENDAR, KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
Y. Tirupalamma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(G. Narendar, J.) :
1. Heard Sri. Mattegunta Sudhir, the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional Advocate General for the official respondents and Sri. Narra Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents.
2. In all the three Writ Appeals, the controversy centres on the selection of Anganwadi Workers to the position of the Extension Officers, Grade-II.
3. The short question that was canvassed before the learned Single Judge is that the official respondent No.3, who conducted the proceedings for selection of the Extension Officers, Grade-II has omitted to comply with the notification dated 05.09.2022. Under the said notification, as per the Paragraph No.7, the total marks for selection was fixed as 50 and out of the said total, 45 marks was assigned for the objective test and 05 marks for proficiency test i.e., proficiency in spoken English.
4. The respondent No.3 instead of conducting the proficiency test in spoken English for all the candidates, has acted arbitrarily and restricted the same to a limited number and has not conducted any proficiency test for the petitioners. That the same being contrary to the notified selection pro
The court established that adherence to selection procedures is crucial, but minor deviations do not invalidate the process if they do not affect the outcome.
Qualifying marks in recruitment are class-specific, allowing candidates to progress in selection regardless of their category, as per Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
An administrative decision does not always require a statutory sanction. For instance, it is well settled that for holding interviews for selection/admissions shortlisting can be done, and it is not ....
Public Service Commission - Civil service Examination - Public Service Commission have no power to relax the recruitment norms - Public Service Commission have no power to relax the recruitment norms
The court affirmed the authority of recruitment committees to establish cut-off marks post-examination, provided it serves the objective of selecting qualified candidates.
(1) Appointment of District Judges – “No change in the rule midway” dictum has become an integral part of service jurisprudence – If precluding a candidate from appointment is in violation of recruit....
The court upheld the validity of minimum qualifying marks for recruitment as a discretionary power of the Commission, emphasizing administrative fairness and the principle that participation in the p....
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
