TASHI RABSTAN, RAJESH SEKHRI
J&K Service Selection Board – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Vijay, S/o Parshotam Lal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Tashi Rabstan, J.
1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.11.2016 delivered by the learned Single Judge in SWP No.1157/2008, whereby the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition directed the Chairman, J&K Service Selection Board to hold fresh interview of the writ petitioner and thereafter take a decision with regard to selection of writ petitioner.
2. The facts-in-brief as gathered from the appeal file are that pursuant to advertisement notice dated 03.07.2007 issued by the J&K Service Selection Board, the writ petitioner applied for the post of Draftsman Civil, Public Works Department, Division Kashmir. The prescribed criterion for selection was 70 marks for qualification and 30 marks for interview. The writ petitioner obtained 48.22 marks for his qualification out of 70 marks. The select list was published on 08.12.2007 vide which 34 candidates were selected under the open merit category, however, the writ petitioner was not selected. He made an application under the Right to Information Act seeking to provide the marks given to the selected candidates as well as to the wait list candidates. When there was no response on b
Amlan Jyoti Borooah v. State of Assam MANU/SC/0077/2009 : (2009) 3 SCC 227
Chandigarh Administration v. Jasmine Kaur (2014) 10 SCC 521
Chandra Prakash Tiwari v. Shakuntala Shukla
Dhananjay Malik and Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. MANU/SC/7287/2008: (2008) 4 SCC 171
Manish Kumar Shah v. State of Bihar
MadanLal v. State of J. and K. MANU/SC/0208/1995 : (1995) 3 SCC 486
Marripati Nagaraja v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. MANU/SC/8040/2007: (2007) 11 SCC 522
Pradeep Kumar Rai v. Dinesh Kumar Pandey (2015) 11 SCC 493
Rashmi Mishra v. M.P. Public Service Commission (2006) 12 SCC 724
The principle of waiver and acquiescence applies when a candidate participates in a selection process without protest and cannot subsequently challenge the process after being declared unsuccessful.
The court upheld that the recruitment rules prohibit women from the post of Platoon Commander, finding the inclusion of excess female candidates unconstitutional and ordering adjustments to the selec....
Employment and Service matter - Grade-IV employees - Selection process - Selection process is not subject matter of challenge in absence of any grounds, subsequent action of issuing appointment order....
Participating without objection in the selection process bars a candidate from later contesting its fairness; procedural adherence in evaluation is crucial for validity.
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.