Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Constitutional Law – Employment and Recruitment Process – Cancellation of Selection Process – Arbitrary Action by Authorities – Articles 226 and 14 of the Constitution of India – Service law

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment upholding the principles of rule of law in the realm of public employment, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana has overturned the arbitrary cancellation of a selection process involving the recruitment of Tradesman Mate posts. The landmark decision came in the case of SANDEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER (CWP-15452-2019), pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal on January 25, 2024.

The petitioners, Sandeep Kumar and another individual, were selected for the post of Tradesman Mate but were later denied appointment due to an alleged non-adherence to Standard Operative Procedures (SOP) by the local unit during the recruitment process. The petitioners challenged this cancellation, arguing that the fault lay with the local unit and not with them.

Justice Bansal, in his judgment, noted the arbitrary nature of the cancellation by the respondents. "The entire selection process was followed. As per the stand of the Headquarter, the local unit deviated from SOP qua advertisement and report from employment exchange. The petitioners are not at fault. They have cleared all the steps. If there was an infirmity, it was on the part of the local unit, and petitioners cannot be made to suffer," the Court observed.

Justice Bansal further emphasized the significance of equality and arbitrariness under Article 14 of the Constitution, stating, "Where an act is arbitrary, it is implicit in it that it is unequal both according to political logic and constitutional law and is therefore violative of Article 14."

The Court directed the respondents to allow the petitioners to join the post within three months from the date of the judgment. It was also ordered that the date of joining of the petitioners would be considered as the date of their appointment for all service benefits.

This judgment sets a precedent in ensuring fairness in public recruitment processes. It underscores the importance of adhering to the principles of the rule of law and maintaining transparency and fairness in governmental actions, particularly in matters of employment.

The decision by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana is a significant step towards reinforcing the principles of justice and fairness in administrative actions. It serves as a reminder to all public authorities to act within the bounds of law and fairness, especially in matters impacting the lives and careers of individuals.

Date of Decision: 25.01.2024

SANDEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHER VS UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

Latest Legal News