1983 (12) TMI 323 - SC - Indian Laws

Court Recognizes ICAR & IVRI as 'Other Authorities' under Constitution, Issues Remedial Orders

The court determined that ICAR and IVRI are considered 'other authorities' under Art. 12 of the Constitution, allowing writ jurisdiction against ICAR. It ... + Issues Involved:1. Whether ICAR and its affiliate IVRI are 'State' or 'other authority' under Art. 12 of the Constitution.2. Discrimination in pay scales and seniority of Professors at IVRI.3. Legality of Dr. S.L. Mehta's appointment as Senior Bio-chemist.4. Dr. Y.P. Gupta's removal from the Faculty membership.5. Validity of ASRB's selection process for ARS scientists.Summary:Issue 1: Whether ICAR and its affiliate IVRI are 'State' or 'other authority' under Art. 12 of the Constitution.The Court concluded that ICAR is an instrumentality or agency of the State, as it was initially set up as a department of the Government of India, later becoming an attached office. The composition and control of ICAR by the Government of India, its funding through government grants and taxes, and the pervasive governmental control over its activities make it an 'other authority' under Art. 12. Thus, writ jurisdiction can be invoked against ICAR.Issue 2: Discrimination in pay scales and seniority of Professors at IVRI.Petitioners, who were Professors at IVRI, were denied the benefit of revised pay scales of Rs. 1100-1600, while new incumbents were awarded these scales. The Court found this discriminatory and violative of Art. 14, directing that petitioners be placed in the revised scale from the date the new posts were filled. The Court rejected the need for fresh selection for the petitioners and ordered rectification of seniority.Issue 3: Legality of Dr. S.L. Mehta's appointment as Senior Bio-chemist.Dr. S.L. Mehta was appointed despite not meeting the essential qualifications. The Court found that the Selection Committee did not have the power to relax the essential qualifications and that Dr. Mehta's selection was unsustainable. The post of Senior Bio-chemist having been abolished, the Court directed that Dr. Y.P. Gupta be placed in the higher scale of Rs. 1800-2250 from the date Dr. Mehta was elevated.Issue 4: Dr. Y.P. Gupta's removal from the Faculty membership.Dr. Gupta was removed from the Faculty membership based on a letter of resignation he wrote out of frustration. The Court found this removal unjust and directed ICAR to reinstate Dr. Gupta as a member of the Faculty within three months.Issue 5: Validity of ASRB's selection process for ARS scientists.ASRB prescribed minimum qualifying marks for the viva voce test, which was not authorized by the relevant rules. The Court held that the merit list should be prepared based on the aggregate marks of the written and viva voce tests without any minimum qualifying marks for the viva voce. The Court directed ASRB to prepare a new merit list for the unfilled vacancies and consider the petitioner for appointment prospectively if he comes within the zone of selection.Directions:1. ICAR to place the petitioners in the revised pay scale of Rs. 1100-1600 from the relevant date.2. Dr. Y.P. Gupta to be placed in the scale of Rs. 1800-2250 from the date Dr. Mehta was elevated.3. ICAR to reinstate Dr. Y.P. Gupta as a Faculty member within three months.4. A special Assessment Committee to assess Dr. T.S. Raman for promotion to S-3 grade within three months.5. ASRB to prepare a new merit list for the unfilled vacancies and consider the petitioner for appointment prospectively.Costs:The respondent shall pay the costs of the petitioners in each petition. Appeals and petitions allowed.