CLAT Clearance Mandate For NTPC Law Officer Appointment Violative Of Article 16
Case: Aishwarya Mohan v. Union of India & Ors
Coram: Justice V.G. Arun
Case No.: WP(C) NO. 30638 OF 2021
Court Observation: “Ext.P3 notification insofar as it confines the selection process to only candidates who had participated in the CLAT-2021 PG programme, violates Article 16 of the Constitution of India. Having held so, rather than upsetting the whole selection process, I deem it more appropriate to direct the second respondent to accept the petitioner’s application and conduct a selection test or interview for testing her eligibility for appointment to the notified post. Further action with respect to the appointment shall be taken depending on the outcome of such selection test/interview.”
“Even if the argument that students graduating from NLUs acquire more skill and knowledge than their less fortunate brethren is accepted, that is no reason to deny a level playing field to the others. There is no logical basis for the assumption that professionalism and competence is the fiefdom of only those passing from elite institutions. The process now adopted is more like a walkover to the finals for a chosen few, without competing in the preliminaries.”
“As long as the Constitution guarantees equality of opportunity to the citizens, the State and its instrumentalities have a corresponding duty to ensure such opportunity to all.”
Previous Posts
Services Rendered Abroad Amounts to Export Of Services, No GST Applicable: Bombay High Court
Accused Taking Plea Of Self Defence Need Not Prove It Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court
Company Tribunal Not A Labour Court Or Administrative Tribunal To Focus Entirely On Removal Of Director: Supreme Court In Tata-Mistry Case Download Judgement
Keywords
CLAT Clearance Mandate, NTPC Law Officer
