Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 98 (1.17 seconds)
Documents citing State Bank Of India & Ors vs Mohd. Mynuddin on 17 July, 1987

Union Of India And Ors vs K.K.Verma on 19 March, 2018

36] Again in the present case, we find that the CAT has straightway directed the petitioners to promote the respondent to the post of PHOD. Even where the court or a tribunal comes to the conclusion that promotion has been denied arbitrarily or without any reason, ordinarily, the court or the tribunal can issue a direction to consider the case of the concerned officer for promotion but it cannot issue a direction to promote the officer concerned to the page 26 of 27 ::: Uploaded on - 19/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/03/2018 01:56:51 ::: SKC WP-2167-02 higher post without giving an opportunity to the employer to consider the question of promotion. Where the State Government or a statutory authority is under an obligation to promote an employee to a higher post which has to be filled up by selection, the State Government or the statutory authority alone should be directed to consider the question whether the employee is entitled to be so promoted and the court should not ordinarily issue a writ to the Government or the statutory authority to promote such officer straightway. (See : State Bank of India & Ors. vs. Mohd. Mynuddin9 and State of Mysore vs. Syed Mahmood10).
Bombay High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shree Ram Tiwari vs State Of Jharkhand Through Chief ... on 17 March, 2020

As has been held by the Hon'ble Apx Court in the case of State Bank of India & Ors Vs. Mohd. Mynuddin (supra) wherein it has been held that promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right rather right to consideration is only considered to be the fundamental right and as such merely possessing requisite eligibility criteria does not entitle the public servant to get promotion rather it is up-to the DPC to assess the suitability, subject to fulfillment of eligibility criteria as per the recruitment/promotion rules.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - R Ranjan - Full Document

Madhu Bahuguna vs Uttarakhand Public Service Commission ... on 9 January, 2020

6. While the educational qualifications and other academic achievements of the petitioner in Writ Petition (S/B) No.78 of 2019, as detailed in the writ affidavit, are no doubt impressive, it is not for the Court to make a comparative assessment of the relative merits of the candidates called for interview. It is for the duly constituted Interview Board/Selection Committee to assess the relative merits of all the eligible candidates and, while the academic and other achievements of the petitioner are no doubt relevant factors to be taken into consideration, it is the overall suitability of each of the candidates which is required to be assessed by the Interview Board. Whenever selection to a post is to be made on the basis of merit, no officer can claim selection as a matter of right. (State Bank of India and others v. Mohd. Mynuddin1). The Selection Committee is required to make an overall assessment of the performance of each candidate separately, but by adopting the same standards, yardsticks and norms. It is only when the process of assessment is vitiated either on the ground of bias, malafides or arbitrariness, would the selection call for interference.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 149 - Cited by 3 - A K Verma - Full Document

Smt Rahimunnissa vs The Registrar General on 6 March, 2020

16. Post in question is a selection post and it is not based on seniority alone. Hence, question of giving weightage to seniority alone for selection would be an inappropriate method. Learned Single judge has held that seniority is the only criteria for promoting though it is selection based on seniority. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs. MOHD. MYNUDDIN reported in (1987) 4 SCC 486 has held that whenever promotion to a higher post is to be made on the basis of merit, no officer can claim such promotion as a matter of right by virtue of seniority alone. It is held:
Karnataka High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - A Kumar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next