No Legitimate Expectation Beyond Merit List of 50: Delhi High Court Upholds Tribunal’s Decision on Army Permanent Commission

62
0
Share:
tribunal notice bharat College Eviction full Bail Rape RTI Colgate National jurisdiction Bail System Bail Daughter POCSO Transactions Bail tribunal Awards section 8 Disability Statement IAS Child Statement Evidence Parole Equality evidence Divorce Rape Rape Trademark evidence marriage gst Property Merit Answer Key Divorce constitutional Harassment ListCross-Examination Termination Law Law Landlord bail Bail evidence Pregnancy University bank gst bail eviction eviction documents circumstances applicationTenant' Officer business 34 Bail Tax sexual Armed Forces investments service legal child rape property smart jurisdiction property jurisdiction power jurisdiction Absence domain violation Allegations property examination evidence criminal family Notices train principle tax bail club judicial education 148 land dv worldwide property olympics bail trademark

The Delhi High Court delivered a significant judgment on February 08, 2024, concerning the grant of Permanent Commission in the Army. The Court upheld the decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal, which had dismissed a petition seeking Permanent Commission on the grounds of legitimate expectation beyond the top 50 candidates in the merit list.

The petitioner, a Short Service Commissioned Medical Officer, sought Permanent Commission based on the Departmental Permanent Commission (DPC) held in June 2012. His contention was based on his placement at Serial No. 53 of the merit list, arguing that unfilled vacancies from the top 50 should be filled from the waiting list. The primary issue revolved around whether candidates beyond the top 50 merit list have a legitimate expectation for Permanent Commission when vacancies remain unfilled.

The Court observed, “The applicant cannot claim the benefit of legitimate expectation as this Tribunal with regard to the same selection has dearly held that it is only the 50 most meritorious candidates who had the legitimate expectations.” The assessment hinged on the interpretation of the term “legitimate expectation” and its applicability beyond the top 50 candidates.

The Court discussed the principles of legitimate expectation, citing judgments in similar cases. It emphasized that legitimate expectation does not extend beyond the specified merit list, in this case, the top 50 candidates.

The High Court dismissed the petition, aligning with the Tribunal’s view that the petitioner, being 53rd in the merit list, did not fall within the scope of legitimate expectation. The Court concluded that there was no obligation on the part of the respondents to operate the waiting list beyond the top 50 candidates.

Date of Decision: February 08, 2024

Maj Vishal (Now Lt Col) vs. Union of India and Ors

Download Judgment

Share: