In Brief
The Department of Posts (second appellant) issued a notification inviting applications for postman promotion and conducted an examination. The respondent appeared and scored 127.5 marks (ranked 43rd). When exam results were not finalized and the cancellation order was challenged, the CAT and High Court ordered the respondent's promotion, treating the procedural breakdown as grounds for promotion. The Supreme Court held that procedural irregularities cannot override merit-based selection. Since candidates ranked above the respondent had significantly higher marks, his lower performance did not entitle him to promotion merely because examination procedures were incomplete.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.