19 February 2024 Education >> Miscellaneous   |   Employment Contracts >> Miscellaneous  

A recent court ruling has ensured justice for a candidate who was unfairly denied a lecturer position due to a legal dispute. The candidate, selected in 2015, couldn't be appointed due to an interim court order in a separate case. The court's final decision in that case, however, paved the way for the original candidate to finally receive his rightful appointment.

Background:

The Petitioner, a qualified candidate for a Sanskrit lecturer position, applied in response to an advertisement issued in January 2015. He successfully cleared the selection process and was even called for an interview. However, due to a writ petition filed by another candidate seeking reservation for the physically handicapped category, one position in the general category was kept vacant on an interim basis.

Petitioner's Fight for Appointment:

While the other candidate's petition was ultimately dismissed, the delay caused the petitioner to miss out on the initial appointment. He submitted a representation to the authorities requesting his appointment to the vacant post, but his efforts were unsuccessful. Left with no other option, he filed a writ petition before the court.

Conclusion:

The court acknowledged that the Petitioner's selection remained valid, and the vacancy arose due to circumstances beyond his control. It rejected the argument that a new recruitment process rendered the previous waiting list null and void. The court highlighted that the interim order had put the specific post on hold, and the subsequent recruitment process couldn't have included it.

Finding merit in the Petitioner's case, the court ruled in his favor. The Petitioner will be appointed as a Sanskrit lecturer, with seniority calculated from the original selection date. He will also receive all benefits his appointed colleagues received, excluding salary for the period he wasn't working ("notionally").

Significance of the Judgement:

This judgement protects the rights of candidates who face delays due to legal proceedings outside their control. It ensures that a candidate's well-deserved selection is not jeopardized by unforeseen circumstances. The concept of "notional benefits" ensures the Petitioner receives the same career progression as his peers, even though his appointment was delayed.