Upgrad LLM

quashing of advertisement


I work for a state power corporation as Assistant Engineer. I joined this organization in 2012. The organization conducted a state level written test for this recruitment. The advertisement for this recruitment was published in national dailies in November, 2011. The eligibility condition for the post of Assistant Engineer is B.Tech./B.E. or AMIE in the relevant discipline with minimum 60% marks. According to State electiricity board rules, any person who is a diploma holder and is in service with minimum 12 years of service, is also eligible to sit in the examination. But Power Corporation amended the eligibility conditions by eliminating this rule by issuing a circular. The affected diploma holder candidates could not apply to appear in the examination and some of them filed a civil writ petition in the honorable high court against the amendment of eligibility conditions, before the written test was conducted. The high court gave its decision in September 2013, allowing the petition and quashing the above mentioned advertisement thereby giving the liberty to the corporation to issue a new advertisement as per the law.

                Meanwhile, the corporation went ahead for the recruitment process despite this writ petition, conducted the written test in march 2012, selecting the successful candidates and those candidates joined on this post in July 2012. Now the decision of the honorable court came out in sep, 2013. It seems that neither the petitioners nor the respondents informed the high court about the fact that recruitment and selection process is over and the candidates have joined and are working as employees.

                Now I want to know that what are the consequences of this decision on the selection of the candidates? Does the quashing of only the recruitment advertisement means the quashing of whole selection? Kindly clarify this point.

 
Reply   
 
Founder Chairman of Global Lgal Services

Selected employees must go to court and say they have not been made parties so that quashing or advertisement is applicable to them. contact : Global Legal Services,  globallegalservicesindia@mail.com    Mobile No: 9290673693.


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 


Dy Director

selected employees had no vested interests till appointed. They have merely applied and the advertisement is held to be illegal. When the advertisement is challanged then court need to be separately informed that selection procedure is going on. Prima -facie you have not much merit in this case.

Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
Dy Director

In case any or the old candidate is getting overage till fresh application then he can seek court orders to protect his eligibility as on the date of original advertisement.
 
Reply   
 

Hi

This is about the same case. We went to honable high court and filed a review application in the same single bench who quashed the advertisement. Our plea was that we were not party to the original writ peitition challenging the said advertisement. Honable judge disposed off our application saying that it is premature for us to seek relief from court because the company/corporation has not initiated any detrimental action against us.

Then Some of us filed an LPA in division bench. Division bench refused to grant stay on the decision of single bench on 10.08.15. Even then our employer did not implement the orders of single bench of quashing the said advertisement.

Now the original petitioner JEs have file a COCP against our employer for not implementing single bench decision.

Is there any remedy for us as it is completely the fault of our employer? we are in service since july 2012 and have been regularised after probation period.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x