Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

 

Total  

20. The above chart is being reproduced as was submitted by learned Counsel for the respondents showing that even the advertised posts were more than the available vacancies in the reserved category. However, the issue from that angle is not being considered as even on the basis of other material producded before this Court, it is evident that the process of selection was far from being fair.

21. The table showing number of vacancies advertised, candidates selected and the number of candidates in whose case irregularities were found is as under:

31. Though in the present case, the candidates had not put in few years of service as they were merely appointed in December, 2001 and were initially removed in August, 2002. However, still if the facts on record are considered on the touch stone of principles laid down in the above referred judgment, the only possible conclusion is that entire selection process is vitiated on account of illegalities, irregularities and favouritism.
32. Public appointments are not the private property of any party in power so as to enable it to distribute the same only amongst its affiliates. Each and every citizen has equal rigtht to compete and get selected to any Government job and the authorities are bound to follow fair selection process.
35. In the present case, as discussed above, various aspects of selection starting from issue of advertisement in violation of provisions of the 1995 Act and the 1965 Rules, the receipt of applications (incomplete, after the last date fixed for receipt thereof), appointment of ineligible candidates (qualification wise, age wise), selection of large number of candidates in excess of the advertised vacancies, clearly show that there is sufficient material on record to hold that entire selection process was far from fair. No illegality has been committed by the respondents while terminating the services of all the candidates, who were appointed in the process. Once in the cases of number of selected and appointed candidates, illegalities, irregularities, and reasons for favouritisms are available, the only possible conclusion is to set aside the entire process of selection.