Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.72 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 320 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Dr. M.C. Bindal vs R . C . Singh & Ors on 19 September, 1988
9. It is, however, clear that when the Public Service Commission is requested to select. It is the duty of the Commission with the help of experts in the particular subject to hold interview and to find out and select the candidates having requisite qualifications and experience fit to be recommended to the Government for appointment for the said post. While observing as above, the Supreme Court in the case of M. C. Bindal v. R.C. Singh further observed that under Article 320(3)(a) and (b), it is the duty of Public Service Commission to consider and to get itself satisfied as to which of the candidates has fulfilled the requisite qualifications specified in the advertisement. It is also observed that it is the constitutional requirement envisaged in Article 320 that the Commission will have to perform the duty of recommending the candidate fulfilling all the requisite qualifications for the post to the Government for being considered for appointment to the post concerned. It is of course, a well settled legal position that the duty to consult the Commission in the matter of appointment to civil posts by the Government is not mandatory but directory and as such the absence of consultation with the State Public Commission does not render any appointment made by the Government in civil posts invalid or illegal.
S.K. Verma And Ors. vs State Of Punjab And Ors. on 19 May, 1978
13. Admitted, the petitioners were appointed for a particular period with clear understanding that they will have to vacate when regularly selected candidates will be available. Their appointment is purely temporary and ad hoc. The dictionary meaning of 'ad hoc' in Webster's International Dictionary is 'pertaining to or for the sake of this case alone'. In the Random House Dictionary, the meaning is 'for this special purpose with respect of this subject or thing'. The Full Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court in S. K. Verma and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. considered the case of such employee and observed that Article 14 or 16 are attracted only when equals are treated unequally or to put it in reverse unequals are treated equally. The ad hoc employees cannot claim any hostile discrimination qua some unspecified person, who are not even parties to the petition and who in some eventuality may late come to hold the posts, which they are being asked to vacate. An ad hoc employee with an existing service record cannot be deemed in the eye of law as identically equivalent to an aspirant for the post which he is likely to vacate. Article 16 could not even remotedly be invoked. The appointment of the irregularly appointed petitioners cannot be continued for indefinite period as they were not appointed under the provisions of the Rules. They should, therefore, vacate for the regularly selected candidates under the Rules by the competent authority.
Article 309 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1