Joginder Singh and Ors. Vs. Roshan Lal and Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 7174 of 2001
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4816 of 2001)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4816 of 2001)
Petitioner: Joginder Singh and Ors.
Respondent: Roshan Lal and Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 7174 of 2001
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4816 of 2001)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4816 of 2001)
Judges: B.N. KIRPAL & ASHOK BHAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Dec 10, 2001
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION
Article 226 – Jurisdiction under – Selection for book-binder – Test held on two days – Select list prepared and appointments made – On challenge, High Court quashing – Justification. Held that High Court in its writ jurisdiction cannot act like appellate authority. Selection process having been held for two days by itself would not mean that process was not fair when there is no mala fide against members of select committee. High Court orders set aside.
Held:
The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not supposed to act as an appellant authority over the decision of the departmental selection committee. If the committee has been properly constituted, as in this case, and the post is advertised and a selection process known to law which is fair to all, is followed, then the High Court could have no jurisdiction to go into a question whether the departmental selection committee conducted the test properly or not when there is no allegation of mala fide or bias against any member of the committee. Merely because there were a large number of candidates who appeared on two days, cannot ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was a farce and fair chance was not given. Merely because only two days were spent in conducting the interviews for selection of class IV posts cannot lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was not proper. (Para 5)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in this appeal is
the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which by the impugned judgment had quashed the selection of the learner book binder which had been conducted by a duly appointed selection committee.
3. The respondents had applied along with a large number of candidates for appointment to the post of book-binder. The process of selection was that of practical cum interview test. On the basis of the advertisement, 528 applications, amongst them of the respondents and the appellants, were received; 323 candidates appeared for the test on two days namely, 12th August, 1998 and 13th August, 1998. On the basis of the said test, a select list was prepared by the departmental selection committee whereupon the appellants were appointed.
4. In the judgment under appeal, the High Court observed :
“in its opinion, fair amount of time should be given to each one of the candidates so that he may be able to show his worth, ability as per his intellect, to the members of the selection committee”.
5. The High Court further observed :
“that it had no hesitation to hold that the process of selection was a farce and the fair chance was never given to the candidates to show their worth.”
On the facts on record we see no justification for the High Court to have come to this conclusion. The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not supposed to act as an appellant authority over the decision of the departmental selection committee. If the committee has been properly constituted, as in this case, and the post is advertised and a selection process known to law which is fair to all, is followed, then the High Court could have no jurisdiction to go into a question whether the departmental selection committee conducted the test properly or not when there is no allegation of mala fide or bias against any member of the committee. Merely because there were a large number of candidates who appeared on two days cannot ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was a farce and fair chance was not given, Normally, experienced persons are appointed as members of the selection committee and how much time should be spent with a candidate would vary from person to person. Merely because only two days were spent in conducting the interviews for selection of class IV posts cannot lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was not proper.
6. For the aforesaid reason, we allow this appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court. As a result thereof, the writ petition filed by the respondents stands dismissed.
7. There shall be no order as to costs.
1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in this appeal is
the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which by the impugned judgment had quashed the selection of the learner book binder which had been conducted by a duly appointed selection committee.
3. The respondents had applied along with a large number of candidates for appointment to the post of book-binder. The process of selection was that of practical cum interview test. On the basis of the advertisement, 528 applications, amongst them of the respondents and the appellants, were received; 323 candidates appeared for the test on two days namely, 12th August, 1998 and 13th August, 1998. On the basis of the said test, a select list was prepared by the departmental selection committee whereupon the appellants were appointed.
4. In the judgment under appeal, the High Court observed :
“in its opinion, fair amount of time should be given to each one of the candidates so that he may be able to show his worth, ability as per his intellect, to the members of the selection committee”.
5. The High Court further observed :
“that it had no hesitation to hold that the process of selection was a farce and the fair chance was never given to the candidates to show their worth.”
On the facts on record we see no justification for the High Court to have come to this conclusion. The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not supposed to act as an appellant authority over the decision of the departmental selection committee. If the committee has been properly constituted, as in this case, and the post is advertised and a selection process known to law which is fair to all, is followed, then the High Court could have no jurisdiction to go into a question whether the departmental selection committee conducted the test properly or not when there is no allegation of mala fide or bias against any member of the committee. Merely because there were a large number of candidates who appeared on two days cannot ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was a farce and fair chance was not given, Normally, experienced persons are appointed as members of the selection committee and how much time should be spent with a candidate would vary from person to person. Merely because only two days were spent in conducting the interviews for selection of class IV posts cannot lead to the conclusion that the process of selection was not proper.
6. For the aforesaid reason, we allow this appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court. As a result thereof, the writ petition filed by the respondents stands dismissed.
7. There shall be no order as to costs.
