2017 (9) TMI 2022 - SC - Indian Laws

Candidate cannot challenge recruitment process after participating and failing selection due to estoppel principle

SC held that a candidate cannot challenge the recruitment process after participating in it and being unsuccessful. The respondent applied for a Music ... Principles of Estoppel - seeking promotion on the basis of seniority in another school (in the Light to the Blind School, Varkala) after having applied for being considered for appointment as Music Teacher in the Samuel LMS High School - whether both the schools are same or distinct identity. An objection was raised that since Respondent No. 1 herein had taken part in the selection process, she could not, after being not selected, be permitted to turn around and claim that the process of direct recruitment could not have been resorted to by the Management of Samuel LMS High School. HELD THAT:- In MADAN LAL & ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ORS [1995 (2) TMI 441 - SUPREME COURT], the Petitioner laid challenge to the manner and method of conducting viva-voce test after they had appeared in the same and were unsuccessful. This Court held It is now well settled that if a candidate takes a calculated chance and appears at the interview, then, only because the result of the interview is not palatable to him, he cannot turn round and subsequently contend that the process of interview was unfair or Selection Committee was not properly constituted. As far as the present case is concerned an advertisement was issued by Respondent No. 6 inviting applications for the post of Music Teacher in Samuel LMS High School. Respondent No. 1 did not raise any objection at that stage that the post could not be filled in by direct recruitment and she should be considered for promotion. Not only that, she in fact, applied for the post and took part in the selection process. After having taken part in the selection process and being found lower in merit to the Appellant, she cannot at this stage be permitted to turn around and claim that the post could not be filled in by direct recruitment. The reasoning of the learned Single Judge in rejecting the objection is not in consonance with the law laid down by this Court. The order dated 25.07.2003 of the learned Single Judge is set aside - appeal allowed. Issues:1. Interpretation of Rule 43 of Kerala Education Rules (KER) regarding promotion within schools under the same management.2. Estoppel against challenging the selection process after participating in it.Interpretation of Rule 43 of Kerala Education Rules (KER):The case involved a dispute over the promotion of a part-time Music Teacher from one school to another under the same management in Kerala. The respondent, who was working at a school for differently-abled children, claimed entitlement to promotion based on seniority when a direct recruitment process was conducted for a Music Teacher position at another school under the same management. The respondent's argument was that both schools should be considered as one unit for promotion purposes. Various authorities, including the District Educational Officer, Deputy Director of Education, Director of Public Instruction, and State Government, had ruled against the respondent's claim, asserting that the schools were separate entities and Rule 43 of KER did not apply. The High Court of Kerala, however, held in favor of the respondent, stating that both schools formed one unit, and the respondent was entitled to promotion in the other school.Estoppel against challenging the selection process:The main contention raised by the appellant was that the respondent, after participating in the selection process for the Music Teacher position and not being selected, should be estopped from challenging the process. The Supreme Court referred to various precedents to establish the principle that a candidate who voluntarily participates in a selection process and is unsuccessful cannot subsequently challenge the fairness of the process. Citing cases like Dr. G. Sarna v. University of Lucknow, Madan Lal v. State of J & K, and Manish Kumar Shahi v. State of Bihar, the court emphasized that candidates cannot question the selection process after voluntarily participating in it. The court held that the respondent, having applied for the position and participated in the selection process, could not now dispute the validity of the direct recruitment process.The Supreme Court ultimately allowed the appeals filed by the appellant, setting aside the High Court's order and dismissing the respondent's writ petition as not maintainable. The judgment clarified the principles of estoppel in challenging selection processes and emphasized the importance of upholding decisions made after candidates voluntarily participate in such processes.