Back
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
Mohan Lal Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, therefore they were heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. However for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (S/S) No.338 of 2022 alone are being considered and discussed.
3. Petitioner responded to an advertisement dated 13.10.2021 issued by Uttarakhand Medical Service Selection Board (respondent no. 3), whereby applications were invited for appointment to 306 posts in Technician cadre in Government Medical Colleges. The said advertisement was issued in terms of the Recruitment Rules notified on 13.04.2020, in which one of the condition of eligibility was two years experience in the related field, from an Institute recognised by State Government.
4. However, the requirement of having two years experience in the related field from a Government recognised Institute, was done away with by an amendment in the Recruitment Rules made vide notification dated 29.11.2021 and instead, it was provided that one should have completed internship in the related field.
5. Copy of the amended Rules was sent by the Appointing Authority to the Select
The principle that candidates do not acquire a vested right to appointment but have a legitimate expectation to be evaluated according to the rules in effect at the time of their application, and tha....
(1) Appointment – Even if relevant rules permit competent authority to set benchmarks at different stages of recruitment process, same must be done at any time before relevant stage is reached.(2) Ap....
The court established that amendments to recruitment rules can change the selection process, and the discretion of the recruiting agency in determining the method of selection is upheld unless found ....
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 : Court also has a corresponding duty to examine what is the nature of the change sought to be brought and simply, by the jargon "Rules of the game cannot be changed", this Court cannot ....
Recruitment - plea raised by the petitioners is fallacious - As mere acquiring of qualification at a relevant point of time cannot give rise to an expectation, much less, legitimate expectation of ap....
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
