Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (0.30 seconds)Pradeep Kumar And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. [Along With ... on 27 March, 2006
He also placed reliance on the orders passed in O.A No. 1185/02 Harsh Mani Vs. U.O.I & Ors decided on 24.11.2004 and O.A No. 1232/06 Pradeep Kumar & Ors. Vs. U.O.I & Ors decided 27.02.2008 and argued that till the last candidate in the select list is given appointment the list cannot be said to be exhausted and person like the applicant, who was in waiting list has a right to be considered against the available vacancy till the date of issuance of advertisement. Lastly he placed reliance upon following judgments: -
Ajay Kumar Poeia ` vs Shyam And Ors on 11 December, 2003
b. AIR 2004 SC 1941 Ajay Kumar Poeia Vs. Shyam & Ors.
M. Subba Reddy & Another vs A.P. State Road Transport Corporation & ... on 12 April, 2004
Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Ishwar Singh Khatri And Ors. on 4 August, 1989
8. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, not permissible in law. The above view has also been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ishwar Singh Khatri & Ors. - (1992) Supp 3 SCC 84; Gujarat State Deputy Executive Engineers' Association v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (1994) Supp 2 SCC 591; State of Bihar & Ors. vs. The Secretariat Assistant S.E. Union 1986 & Ors AIR 1994 SC 736; Prem Singh & Ors. v. Haryana State Electricity Board & Ors. - (1996) 4 SCC 319; and Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. Chairman, Banking Service Recruitment Board & Ors. AIR 1996 SC 976). Hence selectees cannot claim the appointment as a matter of right. Mere inclusion of candidates' name in the list does not confer any right to be selected, even if some of the vacancies remained unfilled and the concerned candidates cannot claim that they have been given a hostile discrimination.
Gujarat State Dy. Executive Engineers' ... vs State Of Gujarat And Ors. on 10 May, 1994
8. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, not permissible in law. The above view has also been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ishwar Singh Khatri & Ors. - (1992) Supp 3 SCC 84; Gujarat State Deputy Executive Engineers' Association v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (1994) Supp 2 SCC 591; State of Bihar & Ors. vs. The Secretariat Assistant S.E. Union 1986 & Ors AIR 1994 SC 736; Prem Singh & Ors. v. Haryana State Electricity Board & Ors. - (1996) 4 SCC 319; and Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. Chairman, Banking Service Recruitment Board & Ors. AIR 1996 SC 976). Hence selectees cannot claim the appointment as a matter of right. Mere inclusion of candidates' name in the list does not confer any right to be selected, even if some of the vacancies remained unfilled and the concerned candidates cannot claim that they have been given a hostile discrimination.
State Of Bihar And Others vs The Secretariat Assistant Successful ... on 8 November, 1993
8. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, not permissible in law. The above view has also been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ishwar Singh Khatri & Ors. - (1992) Supp 3 SCC 84; Gujarat State Deputy Executive Engineers' Association v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (1994) Supp 2 SCC 591; State of Bihar & Ors. vs. The Secretariat Assistant S.E. Union 1986 & Ors AIR 1994 SC 736; Prem Singh & Ors. v. Haryana State Electricity Board & Ors. - (1996) 4 SCC 319; and Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. Chairman, Banking Service Recruitment Board & Ors. AIR 1996 SC 976). Hence selectees cannot claim the appointment as a matter of right. Mere inclusion of candidates' name in the list does not confer any right to be selected, even if some of the vacancies remained unfilled and the concerned candidates cannot claim that they have been given a hostile discrimination.
Prem Singh And Others vs Haryana State Electricity Board And ... on 7 May, 1996
8. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, not permissible in law. The above view has also been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ishwar Singh Khatri & Ors. - (1992) Supp 3 SCC 84; Gujarat State Deputy Executive Engineers' Association v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (1994) Supp 2 SCC 591; State of Bihar & Ors. vs. The Secretariat Assistant S.E. Union 1986 & Ors AIR 1994 SC 736; Prem Singh & Ors. v. Haryana State Electricity Board & Ors. - (1996) 4 SCC 319; and Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. Chairman, Banking Service Recruitment Board & Ors. AIR 1996 SC 976). Hence selectees cannot claim the appointment as a matter of right. Mere inclusion of candidates' name in the list does not confer any right to be selected, even if some of the vacancies remained unfilled and the concerned candidates cannot claim that they have been given a hostile discrimination.
Ashok Kumar & Ors vs The Chairman, Banking Service ... on 9 November, 1995
8. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, not permissible in law. The above view has also been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ishwar Singh Khatri & Ors. - (1992) Supp 3 SCC 84; Gujarat State Deputy Executive Engineers' Association v. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (1994) Supp 2 SCC 591; State of Bihar & Ors. vs. The Secretariat Assistant S.E. Union 1986 & Ors AIR 1994 SC 736; Prem Singh & Ors. v. Haryana State Electricity Board & Ors. - (1996) 4 SCC 319; and Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. Chairman, Banking Service Recruitment Board & Ors. AIR 1996 SC 976). Hence selectees cannot claim the appointment as a matter of right. Mere inclusion of candidates' name in the list does not confer any right to be selected, even if some of the vacancies remained unfilled and the concerned candidates cannot claim that they have been given a hostile discrimination.
Shankarsan Dash vs Union Of India on 30 April, 1991
(See:Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India, (AIR 1991 SC 1612), Smt. Asha Kaul and Another v. State of Jammu & Kashmir and another (1993 (2) SCC 573), Union of India v. S.S. Uppal (AIR 1996 SC 2346), Hanman Prasad v. Union of India (1996 (10) SCC 742), Bihar Public Service Commission & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. (AIR 1997 SC 2280), Syndicate Bank & Ors. v. Shankar Paul & Ors. (AIR 1997 SC 3091), Vice Chancellor, University of Allahabad v. Dr. Anand Prakash Mishra and Ors. (1997 (10) SCC 264), Punjab State Electricity Board v. Seema (1999 SCC (L&S) 629); All India SC & ST Employees Association v. A Arthur Jeen, (AIR 2001 SC 1851), Vinodan T. v. University of Kalikut, (2002 (4) SCC 726), S. Renuka v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. (AIR 2002 SC 1523), and Baitariani Gramiya Bank v. Pallab Kumar & Ors. (AIR 2000 SC 4248).