Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

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

Similar News