Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.39 seconds)
The Joint Registrar Of Co-Operative ... vs Renjini Jose on 8 December, 2025 cites

Shankarsan Dash vs Union Of India on 30 April, 1991

This aspect has been dealt with by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India [(1991) 3 SCC 47: (1991) 17 ATC 95] where the earlier decisions of this Court are also noted. The following observations of the Court are apposite: (SCC pp. 50-51, para 7) "It is not correct to say that if a number of vacancies are notified for appointment and adequate number of candidates are found fit, the successful candidates acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed which cannot be legitimately denied. Ordinarily the notification merely amounts to an invitation to qualified candidates to apply for recruitment and on their selection they do not acquire any right to the post. Unless the relevant recruitment rules so indicate, the State is under no legal duty to fill up all or any of the vacancies. However, it does not mean that the State has the licence of acting in an arbitrary manner. The decision not to fill up the vacancies W.A. No. 608 of 2021 & connected cases -:142:- 2025:KER:94890 has to be taken bona fide for appropriate reasons. And if the vacancies or any of them are filled up, the State is bound to respect the comparative merit of the candidates, as reflected at the recruitment test, and no discrimination can be permitted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1160 - L M Sharma - Full Document

State Of Kerala vs A. Lakshmikutty & Ors on 10 November, 1986

4 AIR 1973 SC 2216 5 AIR 1987 SC 169 6 AIR 1984 SC 1850 7 (1993) 2 SCC 573 W.A. No. 608 of 2021 & connected cases -:141:- 2025:KER:94890 Subrat Jain v. State of Haryana [(1977) 1 SCC 486: AIR 1977 SC 276]; State of Kerala v. A. Lakshmikutty [(1986) 4 SCC 632: AIR 1987 SC 331]) but that is only one aspect of the matter. The other aspect is the obligation of the Government to act fairly. The whole exercise cannot be reduced to a farce. Having sent a requisition/request to the Commission to select a particular number of candidates for a particular category, -- in pursuance of which the Commission issues a notification, holds a written test, conducts interviews, prepares a select list and then communicates to the Government -- the Government cannot quietly and without good and valid reasons nullify the whole exercise and tell the candidates when they complain that they have no legal right to appointment. We do not think that any Government can adopt such a stand with any justification today.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 125 - A P Sen - Full Document
1   2 Next