In Brief
A postal recruitment process in 1995 saw the third respondent selected on merit after clearing written tests, interviews, and being placed high in the merit list. After sending him for pre-induction training, the post office issued a letter retroactively disqualifying candidates from the vocational stream. The third respondent's certificate, however, bore the remark "Regular" alongside vocational subjects, leaving room for ambiguity. The Supreme Court held that the State acted arbitrarily by rejecting him after advancing him through multiple stages without proper reasoning or clarification. The Court directed his appointment as a Postal Assistant with notional seniority for pension benefits, exercising its Article 142 power to do complete justice.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.