IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.S. RAMESH
P.Rajakumaran – Appellant
Versus
The Union Territory of pondicherry – Respondent
ORDER :
1. It is brought to our notice that as against the prayer sought for before the Tribunal, a batch of writ petitions were filed before this Court in WP.No.13108 of 2021 etc. batch, in which, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed final order on 07.11.2024, in the following manner:
1. Under assail is the order dated 01.10.2019 and 23.03.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in Miscellaneous Application No.55 of 2020 in O.A.Nos. 1491/11, 1536 / 11, 267/12, 368/12, 89/13 and OA 413/2013.
2. The issues relating to the process of selection pertaining to the recruitment notification dated 28.06.2010 for appointment to the post of Deputy Tahsildar were considered by the Tribunal and final order had been passed on 01.10.2019 in batch of Original Applications issuing directions to the respondents.
3. The grievances of the Writ Petitioners before us is that, the order of Central Administrative Tribunal has been implemented in respect of all the candidates, who participated in the process of selection, which resulted in denial of opportunity to the applicants. The Tribunal's orders are not extended to all the candidates participated in the process of selec
Rishal and Others Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and Others
Ranjeet Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.
U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board v. State of U.P.
Uniformity in recruitment processes is mandated; all candidates must be treated equally in rectifications to avoid discrimination, as per principles of administrative law.
The recruitment process must ensure equal treatment of all candidates, upholding constitutional principles of fairness and non-discrimination.
Recruitment processes must adhere to consistent criteria as set in advertisements, and allegations of irregularities must be substantiated with evidence.
The court affirmed that petitioners, having previously accepted the selection process, were barred from later contesting the methodology due to principles of waiver and acquiescence, despite alleging....
Selection process legality cannot be challenged after participation without evidence of misconduct or unfairness.
The court upheld the CAT's direction for administrative examination of vacancy positions, clarifying that candidates on the replacement list must be considered unless barred by delay or conduct.
Timeliness in litigation and treating similarly situated individuals equally underscores rights in recruitment processes.
The selection process for the post of Chowkidar was quashed due to unfair practices and violation of established norms, reaffirming that participation in a selection process does not confer a vested ....
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.
Parity – When there is a declaration of law by court, Judgment can be treated as Judgment in rem and require equities to be balanced by treating those similarly situated, similarly.
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.