Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

24. Now the question arises as to whether the petitioner can have any vested legal right to enforce right of selection on the strength of his empanelment. In the case of S. S. Uppal (supra), it was held that after inclusion of the name of a candidate in a select list, his appointment is not automatic and mere inclusion of the name in the panel does not confer automatic right of appointment. But, the ratio of this decision cannot be extended to authorize a selecting body to undertake an arbitrary evaluation process and claim immunity from a legal challenge by a participant who has been prejudiced in such process on the ground that such candidate does not have legal right to demand a fair selection process. Fairness in all administrative functions at all levels of the decision making process is necessary and if a potential beneficiary of a selection process comes with a complaint that he is sought to be arbitrarily excluded from the select list or being subjected to a wrongful evaluation process, it would be within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court to test the legality of his claim provided the person against whom he is making such complaint fulfills the criteria of being State within Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In this case it is not in dispute that the respondent oil company comes within the definition of State. A person with grievance of this nature shall not be nonsuited on the sole ground that merely being empanelled, he does not have an enforceable legal right.