Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

High Court Orders Sports Council to Appoint Meritorious Candidate, Citing Arbitrary Action

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered today, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has ordered the J & K State Sports Council to appoint a meritorious candidate for the post of Driver, denouncing the arbitrary action taken by the council. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, presiding over the case, emphasized that the employer's discretion in appointments cannot be exercised arbitrarily, highlighting the importance of justifiable and non-discriminatory decision-making.

The case, filed as SWP No. 1015/2015, revolved around the petitioner, Ravinder Singh, who was declared the most meritorious candidate during the selection process for two Driver posts initiated by the J & K State Sports Council. However, the council disregarded Singh's superior merit and appointed another candidate, identified as respondent 2, who was both less meritorious and ineligible as per the advertisement notice.

Justice Wani, while pronouncing the judgment, stated, "The respondent-Council's action in appointing respondent 2 over the petitioner, despite the petitioner's superior merit and respondent 2's ineligibility, was arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of power." The court emphasized that employers must adhere to the rule of law and provide justifiable reasons for not appointing successful candidates, particularly when the employer is a state entity.

Furthermore, Justice Wani underscored the reasonable expectations of candidates participating in selection processes, highlighting that the employer cannot decline to fill a position without reasonable cause. "If vacancies exist and suitable candidates have been selected, there must be a justifiable reason to decline their appointment," the court stated. The judgment invoked Article 14 of the Constitution of India, underscoring the importance of non-arbitrary decision-making.

Consequently, the High Court issued a writ of mandamus, commanding the respondent-Council to offer the petitioner, Ravinder Singh, the appointment as a Driver and grant him all the consequential benefits that respondent 2 had received.

This landmark decision serves as a reminder that employers, particularly state entities, are obligated to respect the comparative merit of candidates and ensure fairness in the selection and appointment processes. The judgment further underscores the significance of upholding the rule of law in administrative actions.

Date of Decision: June 5, 2023

Ravinder Singh   VS J & K State Sports Council and ors.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Ravinder-Singh-Vs-State-05June-23-J^0K-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News