https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377187 The court dismissed the appeal challenging the rejection of the Appellant's plea for appointment as Executive Officer. It upheld the Respondents' decision to offer the Appellant the position of Assistant (Grade-I) instead, based on performance evaluations and suitability assessments. The court rejected claims of bias and discrimination, clarified that there was no automatic confirmation provision in the employment terms, and deemed the fresh interaction/interview by the Respondents as necessary. It emphasized the limited grounds for judicial review of Selection Committees' suitability assessments and concluded that the Appellant was not entitled to the Executive Officer position. en-us Mon, 11 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377187 The court dismissed the appeal challenging the rejection of the Appellant's plea for appointment as Executive Officer. It upheld the Respondents' decision to offer the Appellant the position of Assistant (Grade-I) instead, based on performance evaluations and suitability assessments. The court rejected claims of bias and discrimination, clarified that there was no automatic confirmation provision in the employment terms, and deemed the fresh interaction/interview by the Respondents as necessary. It emphasized the limited grounds for judicial review of Selection Committees' suitability assessments and concluded that the Appellant was not entitled to the Executive Officer position. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377187