Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
D. S. Sinha and D. K. Sharma, JJ.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Appellant
Versus
RAVINDRA NATH RAI - Respondents
Special Appeal 313 Of 1998
Decided On : 02/03/1999
RECRUITMENT PROCESS - CANCELLATION OF SELECTION PROCESS - WAITING LIST - PREPARATION AND CONSIDERATION - LEGALITY - RIGHT TO CONSIDERATION FOR APPOINTMENT - ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.
Fact of the Case:
A recruitment process for the selection of Sub-Inspectors in Civil Police was initiated in 1991. After several stages of the selection process, including a written examination and interviews, a list of 630 candidates was declared as selected on 2nd December 1996. However, no waiting list was prepared, and it was notified that no candidate would be sent for training from a waiting list. Subsequently, 86 newly created posts of Sub-Inspectors were filled up from the same pool of candidates who had participated in the original recruitment process. However, 136 vacancies remained unfilled due to candidates not joining or dropping out.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the petitioners, who were candidates who had participated in the recruitment process and were eligible and qualified for appointment, had a legally cognizable and judicially enforceable right to be considered for appointment against the advertised vacant posts. The Court found that the appellants' decision not to prepare a waiting list and not to consider the candidature of the petitioners for filling up the 136 vacant posts was arbitrary and violative of the petitioners' rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners had a right to maintain a writ petition challenging the cancellation of the selection process and the decision not to prepare a waiting list? 2. Whether there was any provision, either statutory or otherwise, to prepare a waiting list and consider the candidature of candidates who figured therein?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioners had a right to maintain the writ petition as they had a legally cognizable and judicially enforceable right to be considered for appointment against the advertised vacant posts. 2. The Court held that although there was no statutory rule or executive instruction specifically providing for the preparation of a waiting list, the comparative merit list of all the candidates found eligible and qualified for appointment prepared during the selection process could be treated as a waiting list. The Court also held that the appellants' decision not to consider the candidature of the petitioners for filling up the 136 vacant posts was arbitrary and violative of the petitioners' rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the appellants to prepare a waiting list of selected candidates and consider their candidature for filling up the remaining posts falling vacant on account of the candidates either not joining or dropping out.
( 1 ) HEARD Sri Sabha Jeet Yadav, learned counsel representing the appellants and Sri Ashok Khare, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, at length and in detail.
( 2 ) INSTANT Special Appeal, under Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the Rules of Court, 1952, is directed against the Judgment and order dated 28th May, 1997, rendered by his Lordship Honble markande Katju. J, in Ravindra Nath Rai and others v. State of U. P, and others. Civil Misc. Writ petition No. 40495 of 1996, allowing the writ petition and giving to the appellants the following direction :
"the respondents are directed to prepare a waiting list in the said examination and consider and appoint the persons in the waiting list in accordance with merit to the extent of the number of candidates in the main select list who had not joined. "
( 3 ) THE acts and events constituting undisputed facts of the case, briefly stated, are as below :
"for the purposes of recruiting 525 Sub-Inspectors in Civil Police of the State, the Deputy inspector General of Police (Karmik), Police Headquarters. Allahabad, the appellant No. 5, issued an advertisement on 4th. October, 1991. Later on by means of another advertisement dated 26th October, 1991 number of vacancies to be filled in by the recruitment was modified, increasing number of vacancies from 525 to 630. "
( 4 ) ON 28th June, 1992, a preliminary test was held. Physical test was held on 4th, 5th and 6th january. 1993. The result of the physical test was announced on 7th January, 1993. Written examination was conducted on 8th/9th January, 1993, and result was declared on 19th July, 1993. Thereupon, dates for the interview were fixed from 24th September, 1993 to 19th October, 1993 and some interviews took place. On 2nd October, 1993 a press-note was issued notifying that the remaining interviews were postponed and would commence from 1st December. 1993. On 29th November. 1993, Government issued notification notifying its decision to postpone the remaining selection process. Eventually on 9th June, 1994 entire selection process was cancelled.
( 5 ) THE validity of the order canceling the entire selection process was challenged in this Court through Ram Das Rai and others v. State of U. P, and others. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 21994 of 1994. The petition was considered by a learned single Judge who by means of his judgment and order dated 23th May, 1995 allowed the petition and commanded the concerned authorities to declare the result. The above judgment and order of the learned single Judge was challenged in special appeal which was decided on 19th November, 1996, in special appeal, the Judgment of the learned single Judge was modified to the extent that reservation for the O. B. C, candidates should be 15% instead of 27% as directed by the learned single Judge.
( 6 ) FINALLY, after lapse of interminable period of more than five years from the initiation of selection process, on 2nd December, 1996, a list of candidates chosen to fill up 630 vacancies was declared. On the same date, a communiqu was issued from the Police Headquarters under the signature of the Deputy inspector General of Police (Karaite ). Uttar Pradesh notifying that no waiting list had been prepared and it would not be possible to send any candidate for training from the waiting list. This order was duly notified by a separate press-note of the same date. The training course for the new recruits commenced on 7th January, 1997.
( 7 ) ON 16th January, 1997, the authorities decided to fill up 86 newly created posts of sub-Inspectors in Civil Police from the candidates who had participated in the recruitment process in pursuance to the advertisements dated 4th October, 1991, as modified by notification dated 16th November, 1991 and found eligible and qualified therefore. Thus, the total number of candidates selected for training leading to appointment on the post of Sub- inspectors were 716 (630 for vacancies advertised and 86 for newly created pos
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
