Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)
Hawa Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 17 January, 2017 cites

District Collector And Chairman ... vs M. Tripura Sundari Devi on 20 April, 1990

15. The learned Senior counsel also relies on the Supreme Court decision in District Collector and Chairman Vizianagaram (Social Welfare Residential School Society v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi, (1990) 3 SCC 655. This was a case involving appointment to Grade-I and Grade-II Teacher post where respondent did not possess the requisite qualification. On discovery of flaw during scrutiny the original certificates at the time of joining the defect came to the notice of the authorities which refused the candidate from joining the post. The action in not allowing the candidate to join was held justified on the reasoning that when advertisement mentioned the particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. There is public and third party interest involved. The 12 of 18 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2017 19:01:14 ::: CWP No.15386 of 2013 -13- aggrieved persons are all those who had similar or even better qualifications than the appointee but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint persons with inferior qualifications in such circumstances unless it is clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. The Supreme Court held that no Court should be a party to the perpetuation of a fraudulent practice. The Tribunal had lost sight of this fact in directing appointment then the order was set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 715 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Bedanga Talukdar vs Saifudaullah Khan & Ors on 28 September, 2011

The Commission while examining the matter in details observed that Shri S. Khan was treated as General candidate all along in the examination process and was not treated as Physically Handicapped with Locomotor Disability. Prior to taking decision on Shri S. Khan it was also looked into by the Commission, whether any other candidate's any essential document relating to right/benefits etc. not furnished with the application or at the time of interview but submitted after interview was accepted or not. From the record, it was found that prior to Shri S. Khan's case, one Smt. Anima Baishya had submitted an application before the Chairperson on 26.2.2009 claiming herself to be a S.C. candidate for the first time. But her claim for 11 of 18 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2017 19:01:14 ::: CWP No.15386 of 2013 -12- treating herself as a S.C. candidate was not entertained on the grounds that she applied as a General candidate and the caste certificate in support of her claim as S.C. candidate was furnished long after completion of examination process."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 268 - A Kabir - Full Document
1