2017 (9) TMI 2022

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Light to the Blind School, Varkala. Respondent No. 1 was working as part-time Music Teacher in the Light to the Blind School, Varkala. 2. The Management of the Samuel LMS High School, Parassala, invited applications for filling up the post of Music Teacher on direct recruitment basis. The Appellant and Respondent No. 1 both applied for the said post. The Appellant was appointed as Music Teacher on 12.07.1999 in Samuel LMS High School, Parassala. Though Respondent No. 1 had applied for being considered for appointment as Music Teacher in the Samuel LMS High School, but after she was not selected in the process of direct recruitment, she raised a plea that since the Management of both the schools are same, she was entitled to be promoted ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 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. This objection was overruled by the High Court only on the ground that there can be no estoppel against a statute and the Appellant could not be debarred from filing a writ petition. On merits it was held that both the schools formed one unit and, therefore, Respondent No. 1 was entitled for promotion in the Samuel LMS High School. The two writ appeals filed by the present Appellant were dismissed. 4. The main ground urged on behalf of the Appellant is that Respondent No. 1 having taken part in the selection process could not be permitted to challenge the same after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly because they did not find themselves to have emerged successful as a result of their combined performance both at written test and oral interview, they have filed this petition. 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...... 7. In Manish Kumar Shahi v. State of Bihar, (2010) 12 SCC 576, this Court held as follows: 23. ...Surely, if the Petitioner's name had appeared in the merit list, he would not have even dreamed of challenging the selection. The Petitione....