Back
2021 Supreme(Raj) 1739
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.
Narendra & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 6389/2021
Decided On : 29-06-2021
Mr. Sunil Kumar Saini, for the Appellant.
Candidates are estopped from challenging the conditions of a selection process after participating in it without objection.
Headnote:
[Writ Petition] - [Selection Process] - [The court held that candidates who participated in the selection process cannot challenge the conditions of the advertisement after realizing they may not achieve the required merit, citing the principle of estoppel established in previous case law.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the conditions imposed in the advertisement for the selection of Constable (Driver), arguing that earlier office memoranda did not require counting marks from the Trade Test for selection and that the interview and physical tests were only qualifying.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners had participated in the selection process without objection and could not later challenge the conditions of the advertisement, referencing the principle of estoppel.
Issues: Whether candidates can challenge the conditions of a selection process after participating without objection.
Ratio Decidendi: A candidate who participates in a selection process cannot later challenge the conditions of that process, as established by the principle of estoppel, which prevents a party from contradicting their previous conduct.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merit.
ORDER
1. The petitioners by way of this writ petition has prayed as under:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your lordship may graciously be pleased to admit and allow this Writ petition and-
i) Held illegal condition of advertisement imposed on page No. 14, Phase-II, Merit list on advertisement (annexure-1) and restrained the respondents to ensure the direction of office memorandum dated 15.01.2016 & 29.06.2015 (Annexure-6) in the larger interest of justice.
ii) Direct the respondents to selection made only basis of total marks obtained by the candidate in the Written examination and other test treat only qualifying test.
iii) Direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioners on the post of Gardner and Washerman respectively if found eligible.
iv) Issue any other writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fir and proper, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the earlier directions issued vide the Office Memorandum in 2015 and 2016 did not require to count the marks obtained in Trade Test for the purpose of selection for the post of Constable (Driver). Learned counsel submits that the Interview and the Physical Test were only of qualifying nature earlier and assessment could not be done on the basis of such test.
3. I have considered the submissions.
4. The petitioners have participated in the selection process and also participated in the interview process. Thereafter, they have preferred this writ petition challenging the condition/s imposed in the advertisement.
5. A person who has already participated without any demur in a selection process under the advertisement, cannot be allowed to turn around and challenge the condition/s of the advertisement once he finds that he may not be able to achieve the merit. In other words, a person cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate.
6. In the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Surender Singh & Ors. rendered in (2019) 8 SCC 67, the Supreme Court has held that such contentions could not be maintainable and the candidate is estopped to challenge the condition/s after he has already participated.
7. The writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
8. All pending applications shall also stand disposed of.
