In Brief
The Supreme Court was divided on whether the South East Central Railway could refuse to appoint 624 candidates from a 20% extra replacement panel despite unfilled vacancies in general category positions advertised in 2010. The majority held that although selection creates no vested right, the State must provide cogent, non-arbitrary reasons for not filling vacant positions when a selection process has been completed. The dissent agreed candidates have no automatic right but held the select panel had expired by time's passage and subsequent recruitment cycles had already filled the vacancies with more meritorious candidates, making judicial intervention inappropriate. The case involved competing principles of employment rights and administrative discretion.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.