AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 215 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of selection of respondent No.6. He is further seeking direction to respondent to recruit him under SC Category.
The petitioner pursuant to Advertisement of September’ 2010 applied for the post of Constable under SC Category. The respondent rejected his candidature and he preferred CWP No.2491 of 2021 before this Court. The respondent was directed by this Court to reconsider claim of the petitioner. The respondent has again rejected petitioner’s claim.
Learned State counsel submits that petitioner was primarily disputing marks awarded to private respondents QUA height. The petitioner was at Serial No.14 and if candidature of private respondent is rejected still he would not come within select list.
Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits as per his information petitioner has already joined as Teacher.
The matter relates to selection of 2010. The private respondents are working for last more than 15 years. Their appointment in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Sivanandan C.T. and Others v. High Court of Kerala and Others’, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 994 should not be disturbed at this belated stage.
Disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.