Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: equal marks in M Jeethender Reddy vs M/O Defence on 5 July, 2021Matching Fragments
5. Respondents while confirming the career details of the applicant, do confirm that the notification was issued on 24.7.2014 to fill up 5 vacancies of Chargemen with 4 of them identified for UR and 1 for SC category respectively. Respondents admit that in 2005 notification, an SC and an ST candidate, who qualified on merit were shown against reserved vacancies instead of UR vacancies. A similar mistake was repeated in 2008 notification when 2 SC candidates qualified on merit. This lapse was pointed by the SC/ST Association and the Liaison Cell, after the appointments i.r.o. 2011 notifications were finalized. However, the backlog vacancies of 3 SC and 1 ST were carried forward to 2013 notification and filled up, to rectify the mistake noticed. Nevertheless, based on the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in WP 17264/2013 dated 24.4.2014, the vacancies in 2014 notification were re-notified as 3 UR and 1 ST on 13.08.2014. The said amendment to the notification was not challenged by the applicant before the result of the examination was declared, as required under law. Applicant was not meritorious and no ST vacancy was filled up in excess. Applicant being an unsuccessful candidate cannot challenge a finalized selection. Hon'ble High Court order has been properly implemented. The applicant on getting equal marks of 135 as scored by the candidate at 3rd position, was shown at Sl. No.4 as per the criteria laid down to decide merit rank when equal marks are scored. Applicant name appearing in the select list would not create a right for employment as per law.
6. Heard both sides counsel and perused the pleadings on record. We have also gone through the written arguments filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.
7. I. The dispute is about the non-selection of the applicant to the post of Chargeman-T/Mechanical against notification issued by the respondents in 2014. The facts of the case reveal that the applicant appeared in the exam held against the notification cited and scored 135 marks which were also scored by the candidate at 3rd position under UR category. However, based on the respondents evolved criteria in fixing the merit order when candidates score equal marks, as explained in the Reply statement, applicant was shown at Sl.4.