Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Tej Singh Rajawat, S/o. Shri Shodan Singh Rajawat – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through the Principal Secretary, Sanskrit Education Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard on admission.
2. This appeal is directed against order dated 11.07.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby, writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued and contended before us that the selection process adopted by Respondent No. 2-University was illegal and arbitrary being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as it comprised of interview only without there being any written examination.
4. Second submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that earlier Single Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Sandeep Joshi & Others Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13068/2015 and other connected writ petition decided on 16.09.2016) had clearly directed Respondent No.2-University to frame and notify the recruitment rules. However, recruitment in the present case has been made without framing and notifying the recruitment rules, thereby, allowing favouritism and nepotism to have full play.
Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, private respondent was appointed hurriedly on the day when interv
A candidate cannot challenge a selection process after participating and being unsuccessful; such claims are barred by the doctrine of estoppel.
The withdrawal of a selection process can be justified if it is not mala fide, arbitrary, or for ulterior considerations, and does not fall foul of constitutional provisions.
The court affirmed that mere selection does not confer a vested right to appointment, especially when the recruitment process is marred by gross irregularities.
Candidates do not have a vested right to insist on the completion of a recruitment process if it is cancelled based on valid reasons, including changes in qualifications and reservation policies.
The selection process for public office cannot be challenged unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or bias, and revisions to eligibility criteria are permissible within the discretion of th....
The selection process for public appointments must adhere to advertised criteria, and candidates cannot challenge it unless there is clear evidence of bias or arbitrariness.
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
