Court Must Conduct Inquiry on Mental Competency Before Appointing Legal Guardian - Punjab and Haryana High Court Right to Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due to the Sentiments of Society: Kerala High Court Grants Bail in Eve Teasing Case Supreme Court Extends Probation to 70-Year-Old in Decades-Old Family Feud Case Authorized Railway Agents Cannot Be Criminally Prosecuted for Unauthorized Procurement And Supply Of Railway Tickets: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily: Supreme Court Upholds Rights of Accused For Valid Arbitration Agreement and Party Consent Necessary: Supreme Court Declares Ex-Parte Arbitration Awards Null and Void NDPS | Lack of Homogeneous Mixing, Inventory Preparation, and Magistrate Certification Fatal to Prosecution's Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court "May Means May, and Shall Means Shall": Supreme Court Clarifies Appellate Court's Discretion Under Section 148 of NI Act Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Re-Evaluation of Coal Block Tender, Cites Concerns Over Arbitrary Disqualification Dying Declarations Must Be Beyond Doubt to Sustain Convictions: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Burn Injury Murder Case No Legally Enforceable Debt Proven: Madras High Court Dismisses Petition for Special Leave to Appeal in Cheque Bounce Case Decisional Autonomy is a Core Part of the Right to Privacy : Kerala High Court Upholds LGBTQ+ Rights in Landmark Habeas Corpus Case Consent of a Minor Is No Defense Under the POCSO Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Well-Known Marks Demand Special Protection: Delhi HC Cancels Conflicting Trademark for RPG Industrial Products High Court Acquits Accused Due to ‘Golden Thread’ Principle: Gaps in Medical Evidence and Unexplained Time Frame Prove Decisive Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown; Awards ₹12 Crore Permanent Alimony Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary

Supreme Court Upholds Telangana Recruitment Process: Merit and Zone Preference Take Precedence in Appointments, Rules 30:70 Ratio for Local and Non-Local Candidates as Per Mandate"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court today upheld the recruitment process conducted by the Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board, emphasizing the adherence to the prescribed 30:70 ratio for local and non-local candidates as mandated by the GOMs No. 124 dated 07.03.2002.

The crux of the judgment revolves around the legitimacy of the recruitment procedure, particularly concerning the allocation of posts to local and non-local candidates as per the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order 1975. The contention was regarding the interpretation and application of this Order, alongside Rule 22 of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996.

The appeal arose from a dispute over recruitment to the post of junior lecturers in Telangana. The High Court had earlier set aside the recruitment in favor of Respondent No. 2, directing a redrawing of the merit list. The main contention involved the interpretation of the recruitment process as per the amended Government Order (G.O.P No. 763 and its amendment via GOMs No. 124 dated 07.03.2002), and the consideration of candidates based on their zonal preference.

The Court, after a thorough analysis, affirmed that the recruitment process correctly followed the amended Government Order, mandating that 30% of the posts be filled first by both locals and non-locals based on merit, followed by the remaining 70% to be filled by locals. Justice M. M. Sundresh, while delivering the judgment, emphasized judicial restraint in interfering with recruitment processes and observed, "Courts are duty-bound to consider relevant orders, rules, and enactments before deciding the case." The Supreme Court relied on the precedent set in Dalpat Abasaheb Solunke v. B.S. Mahajan, highlighting the limited grounds on which judicial interference is permissible in recruitment processes.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision, reinstating the recruitment of Respondent No. 2 and thus affirming the recruitment procedure of the Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board. The Court underscored the correct application of the 30:70 ratio for local and non-local candidates, as well as the consideration of zonal preferences based on merit.

 Date of Decision: March 5, 2024

The Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board vs. Saluvadi Sumalatha & Anr.

 

Similar News