Back
SUNEET KUMAR, RAJENDRA KUMAR IV
Kapil Kumar Dixit – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Suneet Kumar, J.
1. Heard Shri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel assisted by Shri Durvesh Kumar, Shri Vinod Shanker Tripathi, Shri Vijai Shanker Tripathi and Shri Shikher Trivedi, learned counsels for the petitioners and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri Vikram Bahadur Singh, learned counsels for the State-respondents.
2. Petitioners (33 in number) seek to declare Rule 15(f) of U.P. Police Sub-Inspector and Inspector (Civil Police), Rules, 2015 (for short ''Rules, 2015'), as amended in the year 2020, ultra vires, of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
3. A further direction has been sought to the State-respondents to invite the petitioners for medical test against the vacancy which could not be filled up as some of the candidates were declared medically unfit, and/or, were absent.
4. The facts, inter se, parties are not in dispute.
5. The second respondent-Uttar Pradesh (Police Recruitment and Promotion Board) U.P., Lucknow, (for short ''Board'), issued an advertisement dated 24 February 2021, inviting online applications for recruitment of 9,027 posts of Sub-Inspector (Police), 484 posts of Platoon Commander and 23 post of P
Post of Police constable – Direct recruitment - To lower respective category-wise merit and accord selection to them on the vacant posts of Constable (Civil Police/PAC) – Held, Such situation eventua....
Candidates participating in recruitment without protest cannot challenge undisclosed skill test criteria post-failure; uniform application negates arbitrariness; no right to relaxation or appointment....
The authority of the Commission to modulate the method of recruitment within the powers granted by the Act and Rules.
(1) Appointment – An employer shall always have adequate discretion with an element of flexibility in selecting an employee – Interference can only be made when a selection is arbitrary or contrary t....
The Jharkhand Rajya Police Appointment Rules, 2014 are valid and do not violate constitutional provisions, affirming the employer's authority to set recruitment criteria.
The approval of maximum marks of the interview by the Government subsequent to the selection fulfilled the condition of Rule 8(1) of the Rules of 2015, and the selection was held in accordance with t....
Candidates do not have a vested right to insist on the completion of a recruitment process if it is cancelled based on valid reasons, including changes in qualifications and reservation policies.
Point of Law : Service Law - Appointment of Sub Inspectors - Selection Process - There is no provision in Rules of 2015 to even remotely suggest that method of recruitment would even apply to those c....
The enhancement of posts in a recruitment process without reopening applications violates the right to equal opportunity under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
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
