Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Experience Post-Diploma Declaration Crucial for Eligibility: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, has set a precedent in employment law by emphasizing the importance of post-qualification experience in job eligibility. The court, while dismissing a writ petition challenging the rejection of a candidate’s application for the post of Assistant Electric Fitter at Delhi Transco Limited, clarified that “experience for eligibility purposes must be acquired post the declaration of diploma results.”

The petitioner had approached the ”ourt’after his application was rejected by Delhi Transco Limited. The bone of contention was the overlap of his work experience with his diploma examination period. He contended that his fundamental and legal rights were violated by this rejection.

Justice Singh, in his judgment, observed, “It is settled law…that the completion of a diploma does not relate back to the date of examinations and is said to have been acquired on the date of declaration of final results.” This observation was crucial in determining that the petitioner’s experience prior to his diploma result declaration could not be counted towards the eligibility criteria for the said post.

The ruling drew upon several precedents set by the Supreme Court, notably in cases like Rakesh Kumar Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Indian Airlines LTD vs. Gopalakrishnan, reinforcing that qualifications are deemed complete upon the official declaration of results.

Justice Singh remarked, “The impugned Rejection Notice issued by the respondent no.2 rejecting the petitioner’s candidature does not suffer from any defects and is not arbitrary and illegal.” This statement underscored the court’s stance on the matter, reinforcing the sanctity of clearly defined eligibility criteria in recruitment processes.

Date of Decision: 15th December, 2023

MANISH KUMAR VS DELHI TRANSCO LIMITED AND ANR

 

Latest Legal News