JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The same criteria differently applied at two
different points of time leading to different
results and consequences, is the problem we are
faced with in these Special Leave Petitions. The
same principles which were applied in the case of
the Respondents to deny them the benefit of
appointment, were not given effect to when it came
to their turn to get the benefit thereof.
(2.) In order to appreciate this unusual situation,
it is necessary to relate some of the relevant
facts of these cases.
(3.) The Respondents have passed the diploma course
in Pharmacy from different institutions which have
been recognized by the Pharmacy Council of India
and are also registered with the State Pharmacy
Council of U.P. Their claim is for selection and
appointment to the post of Pharmacist, which is
governed by the , hereinafter referred to as the '1980 Rules'.
According to them, under Rule 15(2) of the 1980
Rules, all diploma holders were required to be
appointed against the vacancies which became
available in each recruitment year by first
appointing those Pharmacists who had obtained their
diplomas earlier.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.