RACHNA SHARMA Vs. B S N L

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner claims a direction for the quashing of the third respondent's appointment to the post by the first respondent in these proceedings, (hereinafter referred to as " BSNL"). The respondent as well as the petitioner competed for the post of Sr. Technical Assistant; two posts were advertised by the BSNL to be exclusively filled by eligible personnel in the "sports quota"

(2.) The petitioner claims to be a highly accomplished sports person with several achievements to her credit in the field of athletics. She graduated from the Delhi University, and claims to have been successful in several athletic events, such as the hundred metres sprint, 400 metres race, hurdles etc. She has filed copies of many certificates evidencing her accomplishments. She responded to an advertisement issued by the BSNL, issued on 3-02-2004, inviting applications from outstanding sports persons. The relevant part of the notification, a copy of which has been produced along the petition, reads as follows:

(3.) The petition is premised on the ground that the selection and appointment of the third respondegt cannot be sustained because the only event in which he participated, shot put, was neither listed not indicated in the advertisement. The appointment is therefore termed as arbitrary and contrary to law. It is claimed that as per the advertisement only two categories and being listed namely fast runner/high jumper/triple jumper and secondly "runner of hurdle race".