news details |
|
|
| Employer best person to judge suitability of candidate for particular post depending upon requirements: HC | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Jan 31: Justice Rajnesh Oswal of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court holds that employer is the best person to judge the suitability of the candidate for a particular post depending upon the requirementsf a specialized qualification for the said post.
This significant judgement has been passed in a petition filed by Amrinder Singh who filed the petition as as the 2. J&K Grameen Bank did not issue formal order of appointment.
The respondent No. 1 issued an advertisement, thereby inviting applications for recruitment of officers of Scale-I, II and III and Office Assistant (Multipurpose) in Regional Rural Banks including J&K Grameen Bank as well i.e. the respondent No. 2. The posts advertised by the respondent No. 1 included the post of Officer Scale-II (Treasury Manager). The qualification prescribed for the above-mentioned post was Chartered Accountant or MBA in Finance from recognized University/Institute with one year experience in the relevant field. As per the notification, the candidates applying for Scale-II (Generalist and Specialists) and Scale-III posts, were required to appear for a single online examination and shortlisted candidates in the single examination were subsequently to be called for a common interview to be co-ordinated by the Nodal Regional Rural Banks with the help of NABARD and IBPs in consultation with the appropriate authority. It was also provided in the notification that the candidates must necessarily produce the documents in original along with photocopies in support of their identity and eligibility pertaining to the category, nationality, age, educational qualification etc. as indicated in the online application form at the time of interview/document verification, as the case may be. Simultaneously, it was also provided that merely applying for Common Recruitment Process (CRP)/appearing for and being shortlisted in the online examination (preliminary and main) and/or in the subsequent interview and/or provisionally allotted and/or subsequent process would not imply that a candidate would necessarily be offered an employment in any of the Regional Rural Banks. It was further provided in the notification that while appearing for the interview, the candidate should produce valid prescribed documents as mentioned in the notification. In the absence of documents, the candidature of the candidates was to be cancelled. The documents which were required to be produced in support of candidate's eligibility and identity included the experience certificate as on 14.08.2017, if applicable.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal after hearing Sr. Adv Abhinav Sharma with Adv Saba Atiq for the petitioner whereas Sr. Adv Rahul Pant with Adv Dhruv Pant for the respodents, observed that it is the employer who has to determine the suitability of the candidate depending upon the requirements for the particular post and the candidate cannot dictate terms to the employer to interpret the requisite qualification in a particular manner, when the reasoning assigned by the employer while rejecting the candidature is neither arbitrary nor perverse.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal further observed that the contention raised by the petitioner, though not pressed during the course of arguments, is that in the case of Sanchit Gupta, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 while appointing him have relied upon the certificate issued by the SIT Institute, whereas the post required specialized qualifications. It is reiterated that it is the prerogative of the employer to determine the eligibility of the candidate depending upon the qualifications prescribed for the said post and the petitioner cannot derive any benefit out of the selection of Sanchit Gupta. For all what has been said and discussed above, this Court is of the considered view that the present petition is misconceived and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
—JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
