'No Vested Right By Mere Inclusion In Revised Select List' : Supreme Court Upholds Fresh Selection Process For TN MV Inspectors

The Supreme Court has held that candidates whose names figure in a select list cannot claim any vested right to appointment when a fresh selection process is ordered to remedy exclusion of other eligible candidates, observing that participation in a renewed recruitment exercise preserves fairness and equal opportunity."No vested right could be claimed merely by placement in the revised select list, especially when the right of participation in the fresh selection process was not being taken away," a Bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar observed while upholding directions for a fresh selection exercise in the recruitment of 113 Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade-II posts in Tamil Nadu.The Court upheld the Madras High Court's direction to conduct afresh the recruitment of Motor Vehicle Inspector-Grade II after it found that a class of candidates were deprived of proper participation in the selection process on technical grounds. The whole litigation pertains to the requirement of workshop experience to be fulfilled by the candidates. They were deprived of participation as the government had not renewed the approval of the workshops where they had gained work experience. Later, the government granted retrospective approvals. The present civil appeals have been preferred by candidates appearing for the 113 posts of Motor Vehicle Inspector-Grade II conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission(TNPSC), challenging the Madras High Court's order directing a fresh exercise to be undertaken.Vide a notification in 2018, the TNPSC sought to fill the 113 posts through direct recruitment undertaken by the Tamil Nadu Transport Subordinate Services. TNPSC received 2176 applications and after initial screening, 1328 were permitted to appear for the written examination and ultimately, 32 were eligible for interview based on one year work experience requirement in 2019.However, by an order dated January 24, 2020, the Single judge of Madras High Court set aside the provisional selection of 32 candidates on grounds that they had fulfiled work experience for the workship whose license had expired and the government had not renewed it. It directed fresh verification of work experience certificates of 1328 candidates. This was challenged in appeal and the division bench of the High Court partly allowed the appeal, upheld all directions of the single judge except the work experience direction. This was challenged in K . Ilavarasan and others v R Vijiyaraj and others before the Supreme Court but was dismissed in 2021. The selection process was undertaken again and based on marks obtained in written examination, 226 candidates were called for oral test in 2021. Being aggreived by the said list, it was challenged again before the High Court. Many issues arose, and in deciding all the petitions, a single judge directed the TNPSC to complete the selection process and publish the final selection list at the earliest. Even against this, appeals were preferred before division bench in which it was directed that the entire process of recruitment to be re-done, retierating that that there was no renewal of approval for operating the workshops. It also directed the Commissioner of the Transport Department to take a decision on the retrospective renewal of those workshops within four weeks. Based on the decision, the High Court asked the TNPSC to publish the final list and complete the entire process within 12 weeks. Against this, one set of candidates included in the earlier list of 32 candidates preferred a special leave petition, claiming that there names should have been there in the final list. Others who were included in the 226 candidate list both challenged the direction of the High Court to conduct the recruitment afresh.What was the Supreme Court's decision?In respect of those candidates who were a part of the list of 32 candidates but were subsequently disqualified due to expiry of approval of workshop, the bench noted that the Motor Vehicles Maintenance Department of the State has granted retrospective approval to all such workships. So, with the restropective approval, a reverification of the workshop experience certificate was undertaken and they were all found to be qualified. Therefore, the Court held that they would be entitled to have their names considered for inclusion in the select list to be published by the TNPSC.On the second list of candidates, the Court found that the division bench was justified in directing afresh recruitment considering that the candidates were prejudiced for no fault of theirs just because the decision for retrospective approval of workshops were pending.It said: "The Division Bench further found that the concerned workshops were always shown to be approved by the State Government and that even during the period of eclipse, Government vehicles were being attended to by such workshops. It noted that neither the candidates nor the workshops had any control over the...

'No Vested Right By Mere Inclusion In Revised Select List' : Supreme Court Upholds Fresh Selection Process For TN MV Inspectors

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

'No Vested Right By Mere Inclusion In Revised Select List' : Supreme Court Upholds Fresh Selection Process For TN MV Inspectors

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers