Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Praveen Kumar Giri
Shivam Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. , Through Secretary Department Of Basic Education, Government Of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ews reservation applicability in teacher recruitment. (Para 1 , 5 , 19) |
| 2. arguments regarding the introduction and implementation of ews reservation. (Para 2 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. legislative power and retrospective effect of ews reservation. (Para 31 , 35 , 37) |
| 4. court's reasoning on the commencement of ews reservation. (Para 34 , 36 , 40) |
| 5. court's conclusion on the impossibility of implementing ews reservation. (Para 46 , 48) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This bunch of special appeals arise out of a composite judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge on 29.02.2024 in a bunch of writ petitions, whereby the reservation to Economically Weaker Sections (for short ‘EWS’) is denied in respect of recruitment undertaken for 69,000 posts of Assistant Teachers. Learned Single Judge has held that recruitment has commenced prior to introduction of reservation in EWS category. Thus aggrieved, the writ petitioners are before us in the present batch of special appeals.
2. Shri Ashok Khare and Shri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocates leading the submissions on behalf of the appellants in the present batch of special appeals submit that reservation for EWS was introduced by way of 103rd Constitution
EWS reservation was to be applied in the recruitment process for Assistant Teachers; however, due to the completion of recruitment, no relief could be granted to the appellants.
The court established that the application of reservation in recruitment must adhere to prescribed procedures set by the State Government, and any deviation from this framework renders the recruitmen....
It is well-established that an authority cannot make any selection/appointment beyond the number of posts advertised, even if there were a larger number of posts available than those advertised.
Right of the petitioners to claim age relaxation as they were within age and had applied for recruitment pursuant to the earlier advertisement which got cancelled.
Candidates on a merit list do not have an indefeasible right to appointment if they fail to meet the prescribed cut-off marks, emphasizing the need for fair recruitment processes.
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
