Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY
Viboto H. Sumi – Appellant
Versus
Kezhalesa Kuotsu, S/o-Kedoru Kuotsu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
Heard Mr. Tongpok Pongener, learned counsel for the review petitioners. Also heard Ms. Z. Zhimoni, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 15; Mr. L.T. Sangtam, learned Additional Advocate General, Nagaland along with Mr. V. Zhimomi, learned Government Advocate, Nagaland for the respondent no. 16; and Mr. T.B. Jamir, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 17 to 20.
2. The instant review petition is filed by the two review petitioners viz. [i] Viboto H Sumi; and [ii] Keneilekho Sophie, seeking review / recall / modification of a Judgment and Order dated 26.09.2024 passed in a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 317/2023.
3. The writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 317/2023 was preferred by fifteen nos. of writ petitioners, who are arrayed in this review petition as respondent nos. 1 to 15, challenging appointments of forty nos. of Sub-Inspector of Police [SI]/Unarmed Branch Sub-Inspector of Police [UBSI]/Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police [ASI]/Instructor Havildar in Nagaland Police by the State respondent authorities on different dates in the years, 2019 and 2020, vide Orders of Appointments, annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-B to Annexure-B-37. The said allege
The court upheld the validity of appointments made following a proper recruitment process, emphasizing adherence to constitutional mandates in public employment.
Appointments to public posts must follow a transparent recruitment process, including advertisement, to uphold constitutional rights to equality and fair opportunity.
Appointments to public posts must be made through a transparent process involving public advertisement to ensure equality of opportunity as mandated by the Constitution.
A candidate must meet the established criteria and cut-off marks to be considered for appointment, and vacancies cannot provide an indefeasible right to appointment when the selection process is comp....
It is a settled legal proposition that the court should not set aside the order which appears to be illegal, if its effect is to revive another illegal order
The State must comply with court orders regarding compassionate appointments, and cannot disregard judicial decisions based on non-indigenous status or qualifications without proper legal grounds.
Eligibility for ex-servicemen posts must be assessed as of the last date of application submission, and selections made contrary to this principle are invalid.
Innocent appointees of an erroneous evaluation should not be ousted from service, especially when there is no fraud or misrepresentation on their part.
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
