Supreme Court Awards Rs. 6 Lakh to Man Acquitted After 6 Years, Faults UP Police Probe  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Can Restore Power on 50% Deposit in Arbitrary Theft Assessments  ||  Supreme Court: Cooperative Society Cannot Deny RTI Records as Personal if Registrar Can Access Them  ||  SC: CoC Cannot Withdraw Approved Resolution Plan Over Improved Corporate Debtor Finances  ||  Delhi High Court: 24-Week Limit Alone Cannot Restrict Medical Termination of Pregnancy  ||  Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge to 18% GST on Online Legal Database Services  ||  Madras High Court: FIR Registration Does Not Decide Guilt; Prior Hearing of Accused Not Required  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Speedy Prosecution Sanction Process in Sabarimala Gold Theft Case  ||  Allahabad HC: Missing RT-PCR Report Cannot Bar COVID-19 Compensation if Records Confirm Infection  ||  MP High Court Directs Indore Police to Deploy Volunteers for Reporting Noise Pollution Violations    

The Union of India and Ors. Vs. Jagdish P. Awale and Ors. - (High Court of Bombay) (04 Mar 2024)

The State or the employer is under no legal obligation to fill-up the vacancies advertised

MANU/MH/1454/2024

Service

By instituting the present proceedings, the Petitioners have challenged the judgment passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal ("Tribunal") whereby the Original Application filed by the Respondents has been allowed and a direction has been issued to the Petitioners to consider the Respondents for recruitment as unskilled labourers pursuant to the advertisement dated 19th November 2005 from the stage at which the recruitment process is said to have been cancelled on 11th February 2008.

The State or the employer is under no legal obligation to fill-up the vacancies advertised. Merely because of selection of a candidate, he does not get indefeasible or vested right to be appointed. In case where a candidate has only been subjected to interview and physical tests and recruitment process is not complete, he shall not have any vested right to be considered for an appointment, and even after completion of recruitment process the State or the employer has right to cancel the recruitment process once initiated, provided there are valid reasons for the same.

The recruitment process initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 19th November 2005 was deferred on account of interim order passed by the Tribunal on 22nd December 2006 in Original Application. This very recruitment process was subsequently cancelled with a view to give effect to the judgment and order dated 6th June 2007 passed by the Tribunal in Original Application which was finally allowed with a direction to the Petitioners to absorb certain Group-D employees. Thus, the reason available for cancellation of the recruitment process initiated pursuant to the advertisement dated 19th November 2005 in which the Respondents had participated, is legitimate and no fault can be thus found with the Petitioners in cancelling the recruitment process.

Further, any direction to fill-up any vacancy to the employer having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, cannot be approved of. Such a direction in the facts of the present case was completely unwarranted. The judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal is quashed. Petition allowed.

Tags : VACANCY   FILLING UP   DIRECTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved