REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shubham Patel Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF HARYANA VS. SUBASH CHANDER MARWAHA [REFERRED TO]
JATINDER KUMAR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
NEELIMA SHANGLA PH D CANDTDATE VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
SHANKARSAN DASH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASHA KAUL VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH VS. DILBAGHSINGH [REFERRED TO]
SNEH PRABHA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S S UPPALAND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
HANUMAN PRASAD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JAIPUR VS. DAULAT MAL JAIN [REFERRED TO]
BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
VICE CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD VS. ANAND PRAKASH MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. RAM KUMAR MANN [REFERRED TO]
SYNDICATE BANK VS. SHANKAR PAUL [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA SC AND ST EMPLOYEES ASSN VS. A ARTHUR JEEN [REFERRED TO]
VINODAN T VS. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT [REFERRED TO]
YOGESH KUMAR VS. GOVERNMENT OF NTC DELHI [REFERRED TO]
BAITARANI GRAMIYA BANK VS. PALLAB KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL VS. PAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDER CHAUDHARY VS. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
S S BALU VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:

(2.) It is the case of petitioners that they appeared in examination of Group-IV Combined Recruitment Examination, 2018 conducted by Professional Examination Board and on 12/12/2018 some candidates were selected to the post of Assistant Grade-III and some were selected for Steno Typist in the department of Chief Electoral Officer. It is submitted that respondent No.3 is under obligation to issue appointment orders of petitioners within three months of their selection as per procedure of recruitment but they have not issued the same till today, whereas validity of merit list is up to 12/12/2019. Thus, it is the case of petitioners that although they have been selected but their orders of appointment have not been issued. Thereafter, during pendency of writ petition, the petition was amended and an additional relief was claimed thereby seeking quashment of order dtd. 11/11/2019 by which merit list was cancelled.

(3.) The moot question for consideration is as to whether a selected candidate has a right to claim appointment or not?

Click here to view full judgment.

SHUBHAM PATEL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address