HITENDRA SINGH Vs. P.D.KRISHI VIDYAPEETH
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-14
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on
April 04,2014
Hitendra Singh
Appellant
VERSUS
P.D.Krishi Vidyapeeth
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
UNION OF INDIA VS. JAWAHAR SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2015-1-129] [REFERRED TO]PAWAN KUMAR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-8-34] [REFERRED TO]
SHRUTI RAMESH WANKHEDE VS. VASANTRAO NAIK MARATHWADA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, PARBHANI AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-10-20] [REFERRED TO]
DR. BIMAL PRASAD SINGH VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2015-12-7] [REFERRED TO]
DR. UPENDRA PRASAD SINGH & ORS VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS [LAWS(PAT)-2016-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
BIRBHUM DISTRICT PRIMARY SCHOOL COUNCIL AND ANR. VS. GOLAM MURTOZA AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA PANDEY VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2015-7-116] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR DHAKAD VS. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-9-115] [REFERRED TO]
SUDARSHAN KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2016-6-110] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVIN KUMAR, SON OF LATE L.N. KARAN, RESIDENCE OF FLAT NO.C VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA [LAWS(PAT)-2016-7-148] [REFERRED TO]
ALOK KUMAR SHARMA VS. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR COOPERATIVE TRAINING [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-220] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP GANPATRAO KARAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2018-1-164] [REFERRED TO]
DR PRANAB BAISHYA & ORS VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2019-1-260] [REFERRED TO]
M GANESAN VS. CHANCELLOR, TAMIL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-122] [REFERRED TO]
CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, KURNOOL VS. PENUKONDA SREENU [LAWS(APH)-2019-6-3] [REFERRED TO]
SHALINI CHINGTHAM VS. MANIPUR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION [LAWS(MANIP)-2019-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
PRANAB BAISHYA : ALOK KUMAR SHARMA : SHEROJIT SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA : NCCT [LAWS(DLH)-2019-1-463] [REFERRED TO]
VINIT KUMAR VS. REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD [LAWS(ALL)-2021-3-102] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals arise out of a common Judgment and Order dated 16th August, 2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench whereby writ petitions No.238, 247, 251 and 389 of 2012 filed by the appellants, herein, have been dismissed and the orders passed by the respondents terminating their services affirmed.
(3.)Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth invited applications for appointment against 24 vacancies in the cadre of Senior Research Assistants and 37 vacancies in the cadre of Junior Research Assistants. As many as 3214 applications were received from eligible candidates against 61 posts so advertised. Appointments based on the selection conducted by the Selection Committee concerned were all the same made for as many as 131 posts out of which 76 appointments were made against the posts of Senior Research Assistant while the remaining 55 were made in the cadre of Junior Research Assistants. It is common ground that the selection process was based on a total weightage of 100 marks for each candidate out of which 40 marks were reserved for educational qualification of the candidate and his/her experience while the remaining 60 marks were set apart for viva- voce examination.
(2.)These appeals arise out of a common Judgment and Order dated 16th August, 2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench whereby writ petitions No.238, 247, 251 and 389 of 2012 filed by the appellants, herein, have been dismissed and the orders passed by the respondents terminating their services affirmed.
(3.)Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth invited applications for appointment against 24 vacancies in the cadre of Senior Research Assistants and 37 vacancies in the cadre of Junior Research Assistants. As many as 3214 applications were received from eligible candidates against 61 posts so advertised. Appointments based on the selection conducted by the Selection Committee concerned were all the same made for as many as 131 posts out of which 76 appointments were made against the posts of Senior Research Assistant while the remaining 55 were made in the cadre of Junior Research Assistants. It is common ground that the selection process was based on a total weightage of 100 marks for each candidate out of which 40 marks were reserved for educational qualification of the candidate and his/her experience while the remaining 60 marks were set apart for viva- voce examination.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.