Back
SANJEEV KUMAR
Faizan Amin – Appellant
Versus
UOI – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CM No. 2762/2022
1. This is an application by the applicants, namely Mohsin Farooq Kawa and Manzoor Shafi Bhat seeking their impleadment as party- respondents. They are seeking their impleadment on the ground that they are working against the posts of Jr. Engineers against which the petitioners herein have been selected in the selection process conducted by respondent No. 2. The applicants claim that they, by performing their continuous duties for more than seven years, have acquired the right of regularization and, therefore, no selection against the posts held by them could be made. They also claim that the selection process conducted by the respondents which has culminated in selection of the petitioners is only an eye wash and conducted only to show door to them.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record, I find this application grossly misconceived. The applicants are admittedly the holding the posts of Jr. Engineer (Electrical) and Jr. Engineer (Civil) respectively purely on contractual basis for a specified period. They were initially appointed on contractual basis on a consolidated salary of Rs. 20,000/- per month for 59 days. However
The absence of any rule, regulation, or policy decision for the regularization of contractual appointees and the need to discourage frivolous litigation.
In public employment, where a uniform selection process is conducted for regular posts, the arbitrary and unexplained classification of a qualified candidate for a contractual appointment, while othe....
A participant in a recruitment process cannot challenge the selection of another unless personally aggrieved by the outcome.
Waiting panel candidates have a right to appointment when posts are unfilled due to inaction of the employer, reinforcing equal treatment under the law.
Selection process in public service must adhere to merit and judicial directives; prior selections can be revisited without breaching natural justice if candidates prove higher qualifications.
The court ruled that the selection process for Junior Engineers/Assistant Engineers was fraudulent, violating Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution, and directed a fresh review based on actual ma....
No indefeasible right to appointment from waiting list; employer bound to rectify reservation errors; process upheld absent proven mala fides; no relief for stale claims sans vacancy.
Employers must clearly specify the nature of appointments in job advertisements; failure to do so leads to regularization of initially contractual positions when recruitment processes are followed.
Employment rights are influenced by employment nature and regularization potential based on lengthy service, emphasizing fairness in recruitment practices.
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
