Back
PULLA KARTHIK
V. Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:
a) Declaring the action of the Respondents No. 2 to 4 in not carrying out recruitment to the post of Director (Personnel) for Respondent No. 5 strictly in terms of the advertisement bearing Advt. No. 101/2022 dt. 30.08.2022 by short listing candidates as per the eligibility criteria set out therein and conducting selection meeting for them and, instead, retaining the earlier list of shortlisted candidates dt. 30.06.2023 and their interview results intact and calling the Petitioner alone to appear for a selection meeting on 27.02.2024 vide OM No.2/16/2023-PESB dt. 23.02.2024 as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and in violation of the order dt. 21.12.2023 in W.P. No. 18698 of 2023 and order dt. 04.01.2024 in W.A. No. 8 of 2024 of this Hon’ble Court’
b) declaring the OM No.2/16/2023-PESB dt. 23.02.2024 issued by the Respondents No. 2 to 4 as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional; and
c) consequently, direct the R
The court upheld the recruitment process as compliant with prior orders, emphasizing limited judicial review in such matters.
The legality of shortlisting candidates for a selection process based on rational and reasonable criteria, even if not explicitly mentioned in the advertisement, is upheld by the court.
The Tribunal did not act beyond its jurisdiction, and the writ petitioner failed to demonstrate any substantial grounds for interference, resulting in dismissal of the petition.
The court emphasized that appointments made in violation of interim directions are unsustainable, reinforcing the necessity of adhering to such orders in recruitment processes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointing authority cannot deny appointments on whims and must act in accordance with the rules and with justifiable reasons. The judgmen....
Point of Law : It is open for the authority concerned not to fill up vacancies but such decision should not be arbitrary or unreasonable.
(1) When appointment of candidates is a nullity in law making them disentitled to hold posts, principles of natural justice were not required to be complied with, particularly when same would be noth....
Employment and Service matter - Grade-IV employees - Selection process - Selection process is not subject matter of challenge in absence of any grounds, subsequent action of issuing appointment order....
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
