TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 1323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the selection of respondent 4 and 5 for the appointment to the posts of Manager (Finance and Account). 2. The learned Single Judge relying on the Judgement of the Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Sharma and Another -v- Chander Shekher and another (1993 Supp (2) 611) dismissed the writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the law laid down in the Ashok Kumar Sharma's case was overruled on a point of law in review by the Supreme Court reported in Ashok Kumar Sharma and other -vs- Chander Shekar and another (1997 (4) SCC 18). 4. The facts, very briefly, are the appellant and respondents 4 and 5 were working as Deputy Manager in the 2nd respondent- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsuccessfully. 8. The only contention raised by the appellant before this Court was that although the 4th and the 5th respondents obtained higher marks than the appellant in the category of Scheduled Casts for the selection as Manager, the 4th respondent was not qualified to apply since his results in the MBA examination was not announced as on 31.7.1995 i.e. cut off date. 9. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that it is another matter that the results were announced before the written and viva-voce examination. 11. The factual position is that the advertisement calling for application was made on 18.7.1995. By that time the 4th respondent had already appeared for the MBA final examination. However, he was su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iva-voca was held on 21.11.1995. 15. On 18th of December, 1992 the Supreme Court rendered its Judgement in Ashok Kumar Sharma's case reported in 1993 Supp (2) SCC 611. That held the filed till the review Judgement in Ashok Kumar Sharma's case reported in 1997 (4) SCC 18 was rendered by the Supreme Court on 10th of March, 1997. The impugned appointed of the 4th respondent was made on 30.11.1995 when the Ashok Kumar Sharma's case reported in (1993 Supp (2) SCC 611) had held the filed. 16. Let us now deal with the review Judgement rendered by the Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Sharma's case reported in (1997) 4 SCC 18. 17. The Supreme Court while reviewing the earlier Judgement held that were application are called for p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the law as pronounced by the Supreme Court before the Judgement rendered by the Supreme Court in the review judgement. The majority Judgement of the Supreme Court in the Ashok Kumar Sharma's case pronounced at paragraph 15 as follows:- 15. The fact is that the appellants did pass the examination and were fully qualified for being selected prior to the date of interview. By allowing the appellant to sit for the interview and by their selection on the basis of their comparative merits, the recruiting authority was able to get the best talents available. It was certainly in the public interest that the interview was made as broad based as was possible on the basis of qualification. The reasoning of the learned Single Judge was thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the date of application but did not disturb the selection on the ground of equity. 21. The law pronounced by the Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Sharma's case as stated earlier held the filed from 18th of December, 1992 till 10th of march, 1997. 22. In the review petition seeking to review the earlier Judgement the Supreme Court held that the minority Judgement shall prevail and held that a person who acquires the prescribed qualification subsequent to such prescribed date cannot be considered at all (see 1997 (4) SCC page 18). 23. The date of selection of the 4th respondent in this particular case was on 30.11.1995 when the original Judgement of the Supreme Court reported in 1993 Supp (2) SCC 611 held in filed. 24. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
