Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, SYAM KUMAR V.M.
Ummar, S/o. Muhammad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Chief Secretary To Government, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to recruitment methods in local government. (Para 2) |
| 2. importance of valid selection processes in public employment. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. claims of equal opportunity in hiring must be supported by proper process. (Para 4 , 5 , 7) |
-
-
JUDGMENT :
Syam Kumar V.M., J.
This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 27.03.2024 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.2568 of 2024.Appellants were the petitioners in the W.P.(C).
2. Appellants who are DLR workers in the 3rd respondent Municipality had filed the W.P. inter alia, contending that while recruitment of candidates through the employment exchange is a legally envisaged method of recruitment to public employment, restricting consideration solely to candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange is contrary to the principles of fairness and denies others to participate in the selection process. Contending that publication by way of advertisements is imperative to a fair recruitment process and challenging Ext.P7 order of the Ombudsman to the extent the said aspect is overlooked, the appellants had filed the Writ Petition seeking the following reliefs :
“(1) To call for records leading to Ext.P7 order and
The court upheld that recruitment must allow fair opportunity to all eligible candidates; exclusive reliance on Employment Exchange for hiring is lawful but does not negate the necessity for equal op....
Selection for public employment must consider existing daily wage workers alongside candidates from Employment Exchange, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to interim court directives.
Selection processes for municipal positions must adhere to established regulations; failure to comply renders claims of entitlement nonviable.
The recruitment policy limiting applications to candidates sponsored by a specific Employment Exchange violates Articles 14 and 16, ensuring equal opportunity in public employment.
The court confirmed the petitioner's right to participate in the employment selection process alongside other candidates, notwithstanding prior limitations.
The court established that non-sponsored candidates cannot participate in recruitment processes without public advertisement, as it violates constitutional principles of equality and fair opportunity....
A candidate can participate in a selection process without Employment Exchange sponsorship if an interim order allows it.
Employment candidates sponsored by an exchange must be considered in selection processes without prejudice despite administrative delays.
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
