10.12.2012 Views

Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

xlii<br />

(viii) Recruitment of 17 posts of Assistant Professor in various<br />

disciplines – Only 9 posts out of 17 posts being available<br />

for general category petitioner who stood at 16 th position<br />

not selected - Petitioner contended that single post of<br />

Computer Science and Engineering should have been<br />

treated as unreserved (UR) category and selected him<br />

against the said post - Held - As posts advertised not<br />

classified subjectwise single post of Computer Science and<br />

Engineering cannot be treated as UR as claimed -<br />

Wednesbury Test explained<br />

Chapter-X Appointment Appointment<br />

(i) Petitioners appointed to the posts of Tutor/Senior<br />

Residents, Medical Officers and Senior Surgical Officer<br />

have challenged notification for recruitment to the said<br />

posts on regular basis initiated. Writ petition dismissed<br />

holding that the fact that the names of the petitioners<br />

appeared in the gradation list does not go to change the ad<br />

hoc nature of their appointment into regular appointment.<br />

Chapter-XI Promotion<br />

Promotion<br />

979 to<br />

1000<br />

379 to 381<br />

(i) Promotion can not be given on the basis of Draft Rules 9 to 17<br />

(ii) Whether an official who was considered for promotion by<br />

DPC and decision kept in sealed cover in view of police<br />

case can ask for promotion against vacancy of 1998-99<br />

before police case? – No<br />

(iii) Promotion cannot be denied for non availability of<br />

Confidential Reports for which the petitioner was not<br />

responsible.<br />

(iv) The contention of the petitioner that he was holding the<br />

post more in length deserves to be allowed preferential<br />

treatment was rejected and writ petition dismissed - Sitting<br />

in writ jurisdiction, the Court is concerned to examine the<br />

selection making process and not the selection itself.<br />

(v) Instruction 3.5(1) is a complete Code in itself governing<br />

officers of Groups ‘B’ and ‘C’ posts - The decision in writ<br />

petition holding that promotion panel has to be prepared in<br />

the order of seniority in the feeder cadre irrespective of the<br />

bench mark is affirmed by the Division Bench by<br />

dismissing the writ appeal filed by the Commission.<br />

(vi) In a claim for promotion it is a fundamental principle of<br />

law that promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right -<br />

The right to promotion is not enforceable in a Court of law.<br />

(vii) When <strong>Service</strong> Rules are silent about eligibility date O.M.<br />

providing for eligibility date has to be followed.<br />

74 to 77<br />

254 to 256<br />

767 to 770<br />

771 to 775<br />

776 & 777<br />

778 to 780

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!