(1.) The petitioner seeks a direction for quashing the merit list and the appointments to the post of Private Secretary, made in 2006.
(2.) The brief facts are that the petitioner competed for the post of Private Secretary pursuant to an advertisement issued on 24.02.2006. The advertisement, inter alia, stated as follows:
(3.) Relying upon the reply to the application under the Right to Information Act (RTI) queries, the petitioner submits that the recruitment process undertaken to finalise the select list was flawed and opaque. It is pointed out that a textual reading of rule regarding the mode of appointment clearly shows that selection is on merit on the basis of written examination comprising of one paper in English language. It is submitted that the Shorthand dictation test is only a qualifying process, and that there is no indication regarding the weightage to be provided to the interview. Thus, the Committee could not have assigned marks, and picked up people who were lower down in the list prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the written examination.