A. K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, MOHAMMED NIAS C. P.
STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
K. S. GOVINDAN NAIR – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
1. The State is in appeal before us against the judgment dated 27.11.2020 of a learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 19153 of 2020. The brief facts necessary for a disposal of the appeal are as follows:
2. It is significant that the notification did not specify the procedure to be followed for selection of a candidate to the post. That procedure was prescribed by the State Government through a G.O. dated 18.06.2020 that constituted a three-member Selection Committee to (i) scrutinize the applications received by the Government pursuant to the notification and (ii) nominate a suitable candidate after conducting an interview.
3. The Selection Committee at its first meeting held on 25.06.2020 screene
B. Ramakichenin alias Balagandhi vs. Union of India and Others
K. Manjusree vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another
Lethika Bhai C. vs. State of Kerala and Others
Maharashtra SRTC vs. Rajendra Bhimrao Mandve
Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission vs. Navnit Kumar Potdar
National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences vs. K. Kalyana Raman
State of Haryana vs. Subhash Chander Marwaha
Tej Prakash Pathak and Others vs. Rajasthan High Court and Others
If there are no rules providing for shortlisting, nor any mention of it in the advertisement calling for applications for the post, the Selection Committee can resort to a short listing procedure if ....
Selection Committees must adhere strictly to their authority without imposing their own policies that disregard eligibility criteria set by governing bodies in the selection process.
Point of Law : In case Scheduled Caste candidate is not available to fill up a Scheduled Caste turn, then it could be allotted to an available Scheduled Tribe candidate and vice versa as envisaged in....
The court upheld the legal validity of altering selection norms mid-process to adhere to community reservations, stating it did not substantially prejudice candidates.
The requirement for ACR/VCs as a shortlisting criterion was declared illegal since it was not previously mandatory, necessitating a fresh selection process.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment in public positions cannot be altered mid-selection without just cause; transparency and adherence to established procedures are essential to uphold fairness.
The court reaffirmed that qualifying and shortlisting criteria can be distinct, allowing administrative discretion in recruitment processes as long as they are transparently and reasonably applied.
The court clarified that the validity of a selection process cannot be solely based on shortlisting; proper assessment of candidates and adherence to procedural rules are essential.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.