Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(1). The petitioner filed the above writ petition with the following prayers:

(a) The writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and the relevant record may kindly be called for and be perused by this Hon'ble Court, if so pleases;
(b) By an appropriale writ, order or direction, the complete selection procedure which is being followed by the respondent for making direct recruitment on the post of ADJs may kindly be declared as null and void and be quashed and set-aside and it may further be directed to firstly declare the result of the petitioner including all other candidates of written examination and the marks obtained by him in the said examination and also the marks and the percentage of the last candidate who has been called for interview and it may further be directed to call 110 candidates for interview in the ratio which has been notified by it and if the petitioner as per his merit position falls within 110 or within the extended zone, if the vacancies are increased due to compulsory retirement of DJs and ADJs, then he may be called for interview and be considered for appointment on the post of ADJs;
(4). It is also submitted by the petitioner that 26 persons belonging to RHJS cadre have been compulsorily retired and, therefore, those vacancies are also available and the respondents should have increased the vacancies and the number of candidates to be called for interview should have been accordingly increased on the basis of the existing vacant posts before the interview as the posts of ADJs are to be filled on the basis of interview and the wrilien test has to be held only with a view to make scrutiny and the .marks obtained by a candidale are not to be included in the marks oblained in inlerview and, therefore, written examination is meant only for scrutiny purposes and the real selection procedure starls from selection procedure itself. Under these circumstances, the petitioner filed the present writ pelition with the prayers extracted above.

(24). In so far as the submission of the petitioner that since number of persons have been compulsorily retired, those vacancies are also available and, therefore, the respondents should have increased the vacancies and also increased number of candidates to be called for interview on the basis of existing vacant posts before the interview as the posts of ADJs are filled on the basis of interview. This contention has absolutely no merit. The pelilioner has given wrong number of compulsorily retired persons in the RHJS cadre as 26; whereas, in fact only 17 persons have been compulsorily retired. In the present case, the advertisement issued on 28.10.99, much before the order of compulsory retirement was issued on 9.11.2000. Further, in our opinion, the petitioner cannot make any claim against the post which has fallen vacant on account of compulsory retirement. Promotions and appointments against the said posts have to be made only as per the Rules of 1969.