RAJU RANJAN PRASAD AND ORS. Vs. THE STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.
LAWS(JHAR)-2017-11-202
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on November 20,2017

Raju Ranjan Prasad And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
The Steel Authority Of India Limited And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

PRAMATH PATNAIK,J. - (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioners have sought for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the list of the selected candidates, published for the post of Plant Attendant Trainees in Bokaro Steel Ltd., pursuant to the Advertisement No. BSL/R/2007-05 and the petitioners have further prayed for a direction to the respondents to initiate fresh appointment process after following the guidelines of the Government and after adhering to the Recruitment Policy of the Company.
(2.) Heard Ms. Kirti Sahu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Piyush Chitresh, learned counsel for the respondents.
(3.) The brief facts, as disclosed in the writ application is that an Advertisement No. BSL/R/2007-05 was published for the appointment of Plant Attendant Trainees (Male) in the Bokaro Steel Plant and the total number of posts were 300 and in pursuance to the Advertisement, the petitioners have applied for appointment on the said post. After written exams, the result was declared on the Internet in the months of October-November, 2007. It has been averred in the writ application, that the same was not published in the newspaper. After the Written Test and the Interview was conducted, only the names of the successful candidates in the Final result were informed through the Post. The petitioners who were declared unsuccessful in the aforesaid selection, have challenged the process of selection on the ground that the respondents - Company has not followed the Recruitment Policy so far as reservation of Ex-servicemen, Physically handicapped, as provided under Clause 10.2 as also under Clause 13.3 of the Recruitment Policy has not been adhered to. Being aggrieved by the non-selection to the aforesaid posts, the petitioner no. 1 submitted representation before the respondents-authorities highlighting the irregularities, committed in the selection procedure as per Annexure-9 to the writ application. Being aggrieved by the selection process on the aforesaid posts, the petitioners, left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy, have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of their grievances.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.