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 Freedom of Speech Ends Where National Security Begins: Allahabad HC Rejects Neha Singh Rathore’s Anticipatory Bail Juvenile Cannot Be Jailed Even During Age Inquiry: Allahabad High Court Declares 8-Year Custody of Murder Accused Illegal Mere Passage of Time Is No Ground for Bail under Gangster Act: Allahabad High Court Rejects Second Bail Plea of Habitual Offender Judicial Discretion Permits Tailored Sentencing Even in Heinous Offences: Supreme Court Merely Three Generic Questions Asked Under Section 313 CrPC – This is Not Compliance, But a Mockery of Due Process: Supreme Court Courts Cannot Evade Responsibility by Calling Their Own Orders Ambiguous: Supreme Court Revives Contempt Plea in Land Acquisition Case Conviction Can Stand, But Sentence Must Serve Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Imprisonment in Grievous Hurt Case After Compromise Between Parties Explanation to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act Makes It Abundantly Clear That Pre-2005 Partitions Cannot Be Reopened: : Orissa High Court Dismisses Daughters’ Claim No Valid ‘Nikah’ Without Halala Compliance: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Maintenance Order Amid Dispute Over Muslim Woman’s Remarriage With Former Husband Custodial Beating Not Part of Official Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Rejects Police Officer’s Plea for Protection Under Section 197 CrPC Void Marriage Cannot Confer Legal Status: Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Injunction Against Woman Claiming Wife’s Status in Bigamy Dispute Adult Sons Can't Hide Behind Mother's Saree to Excuse Inaction: Orissa High Court Refuses to Condon Delay in Restoration Plea Judicial Service Exam Cannot Sustain on Legal Inaccuracy: Karnataka High Court Intervenes to Correct Legal Misinterpretation in Judicial Exam Answer Key POCSO Charges Fail Without Proof of Minority: Karnataka High Court Acquits Accused in Rape Case Mere Caste Identity Not Enough to Prove Atrocity: Supreme Court Acquits Two in SC/ST Act Case, Slams “Perverse” High Court Inference Section 482 BNSS | Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Granted Mechanically by Ignoring Status Report & Accused’s Conduct: Supreme Court Mere Presence or Relationship Is Not Enough—Prosecution Must Prove Participation and Common Intention Under Section 34 IPC: Allahabad High Court Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Evidence of Injured Eye-Witnesses Must Be of Sterling Quality — Not of a Doubtful and Tainted Nature: Bombay High Court Acquits Five Life Convicts in Murder Case Refund of Provisional Pilferage Amount Is Lawful If Theft Not Proved: Calcutta High Court Upholds Acquittal in Electricity Theft Case Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Cannot Be Rejected by Conducting Mini-Trial on Disputed Facts: Delhi High Court Section 17 PWDV Act | Senior Citizen’s Peace Trumps Daughter-in-Law’s Residence Right Where Alternative Accommodation Provided: Delhi High Court Access Must Meet Agricultural Necessities, Not Mere Pedestrian Use: Karnataka High Court Modifies Easement Width from 3 to 6 Feet Section 302 IPC | Suspicion Cannot Substitute Proof: Kerala High Court Acquits Man in Septic Tank Murder Case Domestic Violence Allegations Can’t Always Be Painted as Attempt to Murder: Meghalaya High Court Invokes Section 482 CrPC to Quash Matrimonial Assault Case Post-Settlement

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

07 May 2024 8:19 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