Deputy Registrar Of Chits Competent To Act As Arbitrator And Issue Recovery Certificates; Not Limited To Registrar Alone: Telangana High Court Custody With Biological Mother Presumed Lawful; Writ Of Habeas Corpus Not A Remedy To Enforce Foreign Court’s Return Orders: Bombay High Court Ocular Testimony Of Victim Prevails Over Medical Evidence In Rape Cases If Found Credible: Allahabad High Court Condonation Of Delay Should Follow Justice-Oriented Liberal Approach, Unintentional Delay Shouldn't Block Justice: Calcutta High Court Digital Banking Fraud: Clicking Suspicious Links Constitutes Customer Negligence; Liability Cannot Be Fastened On Bank Without Forensic Evidence: Delhi High Court Vexatious Matrimonial Complaints Filed As Counterblast To Divorce Is Abuse Of Process; Allegations Against In-Laws Must Be Specific: Gujarat High Court Sale Deed Executed By Son During Father's Lifetime Based On Manipulated Records Is Void Ab Initio: Karnataka High Court Charge Sheet E-Filed After Court Hours Deemed Filed Next Day; Accused Entitled To Default Bail: Kerala High Court Landowners Can't Use Antedated Stamp Papers To Defeat Ceiling Limits; Section 22 Land Reforms Act Prevails Over Registration Act: Madras High Court Rajasthan High Court Orders Tehsildar To Personally Pay ₹2 Lakh Compensation For 53-Day Illegal Detention Despite Suspension Of Sentence Mere Existence Of Dargah Doesn't Grant Jurisdiction To Waqf Board; Statutory Survey Under Sections 4 & 5 Is Mandatory: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Sets Aside Interim Stay On Delhi Race Club Eviction; Says Courts Can't Halt Statutory Proceedings Without Recording Finding On Prima Facie Case

High Court Quashes Communication and Orders Fresh Appointment in Challenged Selection Process

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, has quashed a communication and ordered the issuance of a fresh appointment in a selection process that faced allegations of lack of transparency and illegality. The judgment was pronounced on 7th July 2023 by Justices Mangesh S. Patil and Shailesh P. Brahme.

The petitioner, Vishal Bahiram, had challenged the communication issued by the Divisional Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and the appointment order given to respondent no. 5. Claiming to be more meritorious, the petitioner sought a reconsideration of his appointment and disciplinary action against the responsible party.

Citing irregularities in the selection process, the court observed, “There is no transparency in the selection of respondent no. 5... No convincing material was produced by the bank which was within its custody to justify the appointment of respondent no. 5” (Para 16). Furthermore, it questioned the deviation from the specified mode of online correspondence and found no reason to serve appointment orders via ordinary post (Para 18).

In its verdict, the court quashed the challenged communication, ordered the issuance of an appointment order in favor of the petitioner, and directed the respondent no. 4/bank to consider the claim of respondent no. 5 for another post. The judgment emphasized the need for transparency and fairness in the selection process.

This ruling highlights the judiciary’s commitment to upholding principles of transparency and fairness in appointments. It serves as a reminder that procedural integrity must be maintained to ensure equal opportunities for all candidates.   

Date of Decision: 07 July, 2023     

Vishal vs State of Maharashtra

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vishal_Ashok_Bahiram_vs_The_State_Of_Maharashtra_And_7_July_2023_Bomb_HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News