Malik Mazhar Sultan & Anr vs U.P. Public Service Commission & Ors on 3 April, 2006
The issue addressed in the passage extracted above in the
Division Bench judgment precludes any discussion on the primary
aspect of the matter that has been emphasised on by the petitioners
at the final hearing. Apart from the petitioners describing the
recruitment process as 'shady' and in breach of the directions issued
by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported at (2008) 17 SCC
703 (Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) v Uttar Pradesh Public Service
Commission), the High Court has also been accused of distorting the
expression used by Supreme Court. It is submitted that the
distinction between 'clear' and 'anticipated' vacancies sought to be
made by the High Court is vague and unclear and the expression
'anticipated' was not used in Malik Mazhar (3).