Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Sri Justice Subba Reddy Satti, J
Vr Bapa Rao – Appellant
Versus
Public Enterprises Selection Board – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counter arguments by respondents (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 2. court's reasoning on experience requirement (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 32) |
| 3. writ petition dismissed (Para 31) |
ORDER :
2. Initially, the writ petition was filed challenging the action of respondents 1 and 2 in not calling the petitioner for an interview. Later, upon the selection of the third respondent to the post, the petitioner filed I.A.No.4 of 2024 seeking an amendment of prayer to nullify the selection of the third respondent. The said petition was ordered on 18.11.2024.
b) While the petitioner worked at Research and Development, he was deputed to the Vigilance Department vide Office Order No.PI/ES- I/03/2007/1032 dated 31.10.2007 (Ex.P3) by maintaining a line of promotion in the parent department. The petitioner was reverted back to the Works Division and posted at Works Contracts vide Office Order No.18/HR/EE/TO-04/344 dated 29.03.2018 and the petitioner was relieved from the Vigilance Department vide Order Ref.No.Vig.B4A/1194 dated 28.07.2018 (Ex.P4). The petitioner was transferred to Forged Wheel Plant, Lalganj of RINL vid
The court upheld the selection process for the Director (Operations) position, affirming that the petitioner did not meet the mandatory experience criteria as outlined in the advertisement.
The court upheld that eligibility criteria for employment must be strictly adhered to, and ambiguity in advertisements should favor candidates only when clearly warranted.
The court ruled that altering eligibility criteria during a recruitment process violates principles of fairness, and candidates cannot retroactively challenge such conditions once participated in sel....
The employer cannot declare a candidate ineligible after fulfilling advertised qualifications; experience from a connected commercial organization is valid despite differing employee distribution acr....
Adherence to original eligibility criteria specified in the advertisement and the entitlement of the appellant, belonging to the OBC category, to relief.
Adherence to statutory recruitment criteria is essential, and appointments made contrary to prescribed experience requirements are deemed illegal.
The decision-making process must adhere to established norms and be free from bias and favoritism.
Selection for public employment must be based on clear, objective criteria, with courts intervening where arbitrary processes are evident.
Employment and Service matter - Post of Assistant Director (Technical) - Eligibility - None of respondents have two years of experience in immediate lower pay level in central dearness allowance even....
The court established that allegations of fraud in public recruitment necessitate an enquiry to ensure transparency and fairness.
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
