“ 3 . In light of the above, since the Petitioner’s name has already been considered but not found to be in the shortlisted candidates, the Court finds no room to entertain the present petition. The conferment of awards, which are fundamentally discretionary recognitions bestowed by concerned authorities, do not equate to enforceable rights. Such awards are based on a selection process that evaluates myriad qualitative aspects as per norms. The Courts have invariably refrained from interfering in the discretionary and evaluative decisions of award committees unless there is a clear demonstration of mala fide, bias, or procedural anomaly that violates principles of natural justice. In the case at hand, the mere non-selection of the Petitioner, absent evidence of mala fide or deviation from established procedures, does not constitute a ground for judicial intervention. Moreover, the assertion that the Petitioner was not shortlisted due to his previous legal challenge lacks evidential support and is purely speculative. The claims of bias or discriminatory treatment have to be substantiated with concrete evidence which is absent in this case.”
