NEELIMA SHANGLA PH.D. CANDIDATE versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

NEELIMA SHANGLA PH.D. CANDIDATE versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

The Public Service Commission is required to send the complete list of all qualified candidates, not a truncated list limited by the number of vacancies. Any selection for appointment must be strictly according to merit among those qualified. Arbitrarily restricting the selection, as was done, without complete disclosure of qualified candidates, violates the scheme of recruitment and the governing rules. The petitioner, having qualified, is entitled to inclusion in the relevant select list and seniority.

Parties
Petitioner: Neelima Shangla; Respondents: State of Haryana & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 September 1986
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed.
Legal Topics
Selection and Appointment of Subordinate Judges, Role of Public Service Commission, List of Qualified Candidates, Seniority, Judicial Review Under Article 32
Administrative Law Service Law Constitutional Law Selection and Appointment of Subordinate Judges Role of Public Service Commission List of Qualified Candidates Seniority Judicial Review Under Article 32

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neelima Shangla

Petitioner

State of Haryana & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) Under Article 32 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Public Service Commission can withhold the names of qualified candidates from the Government and the High Court.
  2. 2 Whether the selection for appointment to the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch) must be strictly in the order of merit among all qualified candidates.

Ratio Decidendi

The Public Service Commission is required to send the complete list of all qualified candidates, not a truncated list limited by the number of vacancies. Any selection for appointment must be strictly according to merit among those qualified. Arbitrarily restricting the selection, as was done, without complete disclosure of qualified candidates, violates the scheme of recruitment and the governing rules. The petitioner, having qualified, is entitled to inclusion in the relevant select list and seniority.

Court Disposition

Petition allowed.

Orders

  • The Government of Haryana is directed to include the petitioner's (Miss Neelima Shangla's) name in the 1984 list of candidates selected for appointment as Subordinate Judge in the Haryana Judicial Service (Judicial Branch) and forward it to the High Court for inclusion in the Register.
  • The petitioner is entitled to her due place in the seniority list of the 1984 batch.