9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appointments on the main-list were made and the two vacancies arose giving rise to the issue of operation of the waiting list. What follows from the above is that even accepting the order passed by this Court in [2011 (11) TMI 49 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], in view of the subsequent facts and events that have occurred, namely, action of the Union of India in resorting to a fresh process of selection and appointment without amendment of the Rules, the right of the petitioner to be considered for appointment on the basis of his position in the Waiting List has once again come to fore which needs to be resolved by an appropriate order. - Decided in favour of Appellant. - Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 202 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 23-9-2014 - R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.2 of the said Waiting List for appointment as Accountant Member. A Public Interest Litigation was instituted in the Madras High Court to give effect to the selections made by way of appointment of the selected candidates. The writ petition was answered in the affirmative and the said order of the High Court was affirmed by dismissal of the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.13681 of 2001 filed by the Union of India. Thereafter, it appears that the Select List was approved by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) and 11 vacancies of Accountant Members were filled up whereas 5 vacancies of Judicial Members were also filled up. Two vacancies of Accountant Members remained vacant as the two candidates who were selected were n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ference between the main list of selected candidates and the wait-listed candidates. As appointments of the candidates in the main list (16 in number) had already been made, this Court thought it proper not to affirm the directions for appointment of the wait-listed candidates as made by the Central Administrative Tribunal and the High Court in the orders under challenge before it and, instead, accepted the contentions made by the Union of India that it would be making further appointments only after amendment of the Rules, which contemplated amendment, we are told at the Bar, pertained mainly to the eligibility of the candidates. It is an admitted fact that amendment to the Rules as contemplated and stated before this Court in Civil Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from the above is that even accepting the order dated 17th November, 2011 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6567-6569 of 2010, in view of the subsequent facts and events that have occurred, namely, action of the Union of India in resorting to a fresh process of selection and appointment without amendment of the Rules, the right of the petitioner to be considered for appointment on the basis of his position in the Waiting List has once again come to fore which needs to be resolved by an appropriate order. We, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on the basis of his position in the Waiting List against one of the two vacancies that had arisen on account of two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
