Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-applicants vehemently argued that though it is not disputed that respondent-applicants participated in the process of selection but after completion of the process when illegality came to their knowledge then they challenged the whole process of selection before the Tribunal by way of filing OA and the Tribunal has rightly adjudicated the matter on merit while rejecting the preliminary objections of the department. Therefore, the judgment which is rendered after considering the entire material on record, does not require any interference and the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed.

We have considered the rival submissions made by both the parties.

It is not disputed before us that respondent-applicants who preferred OA before the Tribunal appeared in the process of selection for the post of Goods Guard and no objection was raised during process of selection by them. As per the doctrine of estoppal, no one can be permitted to raise objection who has participated in the selection process adopted by the department for the purpose of promotion. In this matter, notification was issued on 16th May 2001 and written test was conducted in the month of March and August 2002 and viva voce was held in the month of January 2003 but during process of selection no objection was raised by the respondent-applicants so also when applicants failed to raise any objection during the process of selection, then they cannot be permitted to raise voice after completion of selection process in which they were not found suitable, therefore, in our opinion, the learned Tribunal has committed serious error while deciding the matter on merit and accepting the grounds raised by the respondent-applicants. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Suneeta Aggarwal Vs. State of Haryana & Ors., reported in (2000) 2 SCC 615, held that a candidate having appeared before the selection committee without any protest and having taken a chance in the selection process, is estopped from challenging the selection. Para 4 of the said judgment is as follows: