Whether a person is entitled to get appointment if his name is in select list?

In Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India : AIR 1991

SC 1612, the issue was considered by the Constitution Bench and it

was held as follows:

“It is not correct to say that if a number of vacancies are notified for appointment and adequate number of candidates are found fit, the successful candidates acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed which cannot be legitimately denied. Ordinarily the notification merely amounts to an invitation to qualified candidates to apply for recruitment and on their selection they do not acquire any right to the post. Unless the relevant recruitment rules so indicate, the State is under no legal duty to fill up all or any of the vacancies. However, it does not mean that the State has the licence of acting in an arbitrary manner. The decision not to fill up the vacancies has to be taken bona fide for appropriate reasons. And if the vacancies or any of them are filled up, the State is bound to respect the comparative merit of the candidates, as reflected at the recruitment test, and no discrimination can be permitted”.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                                                                   [C.R.]
                                                 PRESENT:

                               MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN
                                                       &
                            MR.JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

                        27TH DAY OF MARCH 2018

                                     WA.No. 342 of 2016 IN WPC. 8905/2012
                                


           G.RADHAKRISHNAN,
Vs
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,

Print Page

Whether Fast track Court Judges appointed on Ad hoc basis have right for regular promotion on the basis of such appointment?

From the aforesaid two authorities, it is quite clear
that the appointments in respect of Fast Track Courts are
ad hoc in nature and no right is to accrue to such recruits
promoted/posted on ad hoc basis from the lower judiciary

for the regular promotion on the basis of such appointment.
It has been categorically stated that FTC Judges were
appointed under a separate set of rules than the rules
governing the regular appointment in the State Higher
Judicial Services.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6105 OF 2013
V. Venkata Prasad & Ors. ... Appellants
 VERSUS
High Court of A.P. & Ors. ... Respondents
Dated:June 29, 2016
Dipak Misra, J.

Print Page

How to conduct medical examination of physically disabled person for their appointment in service?

 Upon careful perusal of the Government
Resolution dated 14th January, 2011, issued by the Social
Justice and Special Assistance Department, Government of
Maharashtra, and in particular clause No.5 thereof, it is
abundantly clear that, while conducting medical
examination of the candidates from handicapped category,
the medical examination should be conducted like in case
of candidates being selected from the general category. No
questions should be raised about handicapped certificate,
as per the relevant clause No.5 of the said Government
Resolution. The criteria laid down by the
Government while issuing such certificates if
followed and detailed aspects in this regard
are verified and if it is made available to the
appointing authority the said authority will

decide as to whether said person is entitled for
reservation meant for Physically Challenged
Category or not.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.3972 OF 2015

Maheshkumar Balasaheb Naik, Vs  The State of Maharashtra

 CORAM: S.S.SHINDE & A.M.BADAR, JJ.
 Dated : 21.09.2015
Citation;2016 (3) ALLMR 149

Print Page

Delhi high court scraps process of appointment of law clerks in Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court on Monday scrapped the current scheme of appointment of law clerks (researchers) in Supreme Court, calling it "arbitrary and unconstitutional". 

Justice Rajiv Shakdher abolished the system of inducting law clerk-cum-research assistant(LCRA) to aid SC judges saying there are no criteria or benchmark to justify why a select few colleges must be given priority. The court took exception to the fact that only select colleges were being considered fit to send LCRA to SC. However, the court exempted the year 2013-14 since selection of law clerks for this period has already been completed. 

"I have no hesitation in declaring that the scheme/ policy, as formulated, is unconstitutional. This is not to say that SC's registrar general cannot devise a scheme/policy. It is

Print Page