Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Right of State to Withdraw and Re-Advertise Jobs: High Court of J&K Dismisses Petition Against Re-Advertisement of Dental Technician Post

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that clarifies the legal stance on the withdrawal and re-advertisement of government job vacancies, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar dismissed a writ petition challenging the re-advertisement of a Dental Technician position in Ganderbal district under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM).

The petitioner, Abdul Majid Ganai, a dental sciences diploma holder, had contested the legitimacy of the fresh advertisement dated 20.12.2013, which replaced an earlier notice from 13.10.2013. Ganai argued that the new advertisement was an attempt to favor certain candidates and excluded him unfairly from the selection process.

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, in his judgment dated November 18, 2023, stated, "a candidate has no unfettered right to challenge the action of the State or any other authority, whereby, an advertisement notice has been withdrawn or the posts have been re-advertised." This observation came after an extensive legal analysis, referencing several landmark Supreme Court judgments.

Justice Nargal further elucidated, "no vested right of selection/appointment is created in favour of the petitioner, merely because he participated in the selection process." The court held that the re-advertisement notice did not infringe any fundamental, legal, or statutory rights of the petitioner, hence validating the respondents' actions as legally sound.

Respondents in the case, including the State of J&K and Director Health Services, contended that the re-advertisement was aligned with the updated guidelines from the J&K State Health Society and NRHM. They maintained that the petitioner, and all eligible candidates, were free to participate in the new selection process, negating any notion of prejudice or legal infirmity.

The decision reinforces the principle that government authorities retain the right to withdraw and re-advertise job posts, subject to adherence to legal and procedural norms. The court's verdict, dismissing the petition along with all connected applications, is seen as a precedent-setting judgment, clarifying the legal framework governing state actions in matters of public employment.

Date of Decision: 18th November 2023

Abdul Majid Ganai VS State of J&K, Director Health Services

Latest Legal News