GURMEET PAL SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

GURMEET PAL SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

Appellants who participated in recruitment process without objecting to the advertisement or procedure at the relevant time are precluded from challenging the process after unsuccessful attempts; vacancies arising after advertisement or due to error in reservation are not required to be included; carry forward of disability vacancy is valid; mere inclusion in select list does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment; thus, no relief is granted to appellants.

Parties
Appellant: Gurmeet Pal Singh; Respondent: State of Punjab & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Recruitment, Vacancy, Reservation for Ex Servicemen, Reservation for Persons With Disabilities, Merit List, Cadre Strength, Challenge to Advertisement
Judicial Service Recruitment Reservation Law Disability Law Direct Recruitment Vacancy Reservation for Ex Servicemen Reservation for Persons With Disabilities +3 more

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurmeet Pal Singh

Appellant

State of Punjab & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether subsequent vacancies arising after advertisement must be included in recruitment process
  2. 2 Legality of reservation for Ex-Servicemen in Punjab Superior Judicial Service recruitment
  3. 3 Carry forward of disability vacancy

Ratio Decidendi

Appellants who participated in recruitment process without objecting to the advertisement or procedure at the relevant time are precluded from challenging the process after unsuccessful attempts; vacancies arising after advertisement or due to error in reservation are not required to be included; carry forward of disability vacancy is valid; mere inclusion in select list does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment; thus, no relief is granted to appellants.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • No relief granted to appellants
  • Parties to bear their own costs