Are fence sitters entitled to maintain a writ petition after completion of the selection process?

No. Fence sitters are not entitled to maintain writ petitions after completion of the process of selection and after issuance of appointment orders; entertaining such petitions would open a Pandora's box, inviting similarly placed unsuccessful candidates to file petitions belatedly based on subsequent orders.

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art.226 — Service Law — Delay and laches — Recruitment selection challenge — Service Law — Selection process — Fence-sitter doctrine — Challenge after appointment barred — Held: A candidate who allows the recruitment selection process to be completed without challenging an alleged illegality must approach the Court immediately upon becoming aware of the defect, and cannot wait until appointments are issued. Fence sitters who participate in selection are not entitled to maintain a writ petition after completion of the process and issuance of appointment orders. (¶7, 8) Constitution of India, 1950 — Art.226 — Writ jurisdiction — Delay and laches amounting to acquiescence — Held further: A writ petition filed nearly two years after the recruitment notification and about a year after appointment of selected candidates, and only after a subsequent Division Bench judgment on a related batch, is barred by delay and laches tantamounting to acquiescence, and the relief of quashing the provisional selection list after appointment orders have been issued is not maintainable. Writ Appeal and connected Writ Petition dismissed. (¶6, 9)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of 1.B.Unnamalai 2.V.Suganthi 3.K.Ramesh v. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Government Human Resources Development Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009 — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India