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

2024 Supreme(Pat) 103

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, HARISH KUMAR
State of Bihar – Appellant
Versus
Amod Prabodhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Respondent Nos.: Mr. Mrigank Mauli,
1, 3, 7 & 9 Sr. Adv., Sanket (in 604).
For Respondent Nos.: Mr. Satyam Shivam
2 and 8 Sundaram (in 604).
For Respondent Nos.: Mr. Anjani Kumar
4, 5 & 6 Jha (in 604).
For Respondent Nos.: M/s Sarvesh
1, 2 & 3 Kumar Singh, AAG-13, Ravi Kumar (AC to AAG-13) (in 622).
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Amaresh Kumar Singh, Dineshwar Prasad Singh (in 833).
For LNMU : M/s Bindhyachal Rai (in 604, 622, 1007); Sailesh Kumar (in 604); Sunil Kumar Karn, Nadim Seraj (in 832, 833, 835, 836); Shailesh Kumar (in 834, 890); Amarendra Kumar (in 1007).
For MU : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad (in 604, 622, 832-835, 890, 1007, 836).
For BSUSC : Mr. Harsh Singh (in 604, 622, 832-836, 890, 1007); Tuhin Shankar (in 604).
For BRA.Bihar University : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh ((in 604, Indradesh Kumar (in 834, 835); Viveka Nand Singh (in 622); Bindhyachal Rai (in 1007).
For Patna University : Mr. Nadim Seraj (in 604, 622, 1007) Shahbaj Alam (in 604, 622); Kinkar Kumar (in 834).
For JP University : Mr. Shyam Sundar Kumar((in 604); Bindhyachal Rai(in 622, 622, 890)
For Patliputra University : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh (in 604).
For BNM University : M/s Shyam Sundar Kumar (in 604); Ritesh Kumar (in 604, 622, 834, 890).
For Munger University : Mr. Shyam Sundar Kumar (in 604); Ritesh Kumar (in 604, 834, 890).
For V K S University : M/s Ramesh Gupta, Anant Kumar (in 604).
For TMBU : Mr. Ashraf Mustaffa (in 604).
For the Chancellor : Mr. Janardan Singh, Sr. Adv.(in 604, 622) R.R.K. Pandey (in 622).
For the PPU : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Rasika(in 622, 890, 1007).
For the State : Mr. P. K. Shahi, AG (in 622).
For Private Resp. : Mr. Anjani Kumar Jha (in 834).
For the VKMU : Mr. Kinkar Kumar (in 890).
For KSDS University : Mr. Binay Kumar Singh (in 890).

K. Vinod Chandran, CJ. – Reservations in appointments have always given rise to contentious issues of the application of the percentage vis-a-vis the vacancies; which in the present case has stalled the appointments pursuant to an advertisement of the year 2020, till today. The above batch of appeals challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge in a batch of writ petitions. The writ petitions were allowed directing the Government to redo the reservations, by clubbing the vacancies in each subject of the various Universities and after determining the backlog vacancies properly. The State in their appeals challenge only the direction to club the vacancies in the different Universities. LPA No. 622 of 2023 challenge the judgment in its entirety; both on the clubbing and the reworking of backlog vacancies and pray for the selection to be carried out as per the advertisement. LPA No. 890 of 2023 and LPA No. 1007 of 2023, challenge the judgment as wholly erroneous and seek quashing the advertisement for a proper determination of backlog vacancies, but, support the State insofar as the challenge against clubbing of vacancies. The appeals were placed before us along with two writ pet

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