Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Bir Pal, filed a civil appeal against the judgment and order of the Delhi High Court dated 12.07.2016 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494/2016, which dismissed his writ petition. The appellant's grievance was that the High Court had erroneously held that no candidate senior to him was available for appointment to the post of Inspector (Accountant) in the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP). The appellant contended that he was eligible and senior among candidates who had passed the ISTM examination in cash and accounts subjects. The Supreme Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order and directing the respondents to consider the appellant's candidature for the post of Inspector (Accountant) in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Recruitment - Seniority - Eligibility - The appellant challenged the rejection of his candidature for the post of Inspector (Accountant) in Indo-Tibetan Border Police on the ground that no senior candidate was available for appointment. The High Court dismissed the writ petition. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was eligible and senior among candidates who had passed the requisite examination (ISTM) in cash and accounts subjects. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant was entitled to be considered for appointment to the post of Inspector (Accountant) in Indo-Tibetan Border Police on the basis of seniority and eligibility.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 12.07.2016 is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the appellant's candidature for the post of Inspector (Accountant) in Indo-Tibetan Border Police in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Recruitment
- Seniority
- Eligibility
- Appointment
- Writ Jurisdiction
