TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the constitution of the Selection Committee for appointment of the Vice-Chancellor was in accordance with Section 24 of the governing Act, and whether any action taken pursuant to a constituted in breach of that provision was valid.
Analysis: Section 24 required the Vice-Chancellor to be appointed by the Chancellor on the recommendation of a Selection Committee consisting of a nominee of the Chancellor, the Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, and the Chairman, University Grants Commission or his nominee. The statutory scheme made the composition of the Committee mandatory, and the Committee had to be constituted in the manner prescribed by the Act. The Committee notified in the present matter did not conform to that composition, as the mandatory participation of the Director General, ICAR, was not reflected in the manner required by the statute. Once the constitution of the Committee was contrary to the Act, every action taken by such body in furtherance of the selection process lacked legal validity.
Conclusion: The constitution of the Selection Committee was illegal and any process initiated by it was void and unenforceable.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the selection process based on the impugned Committee was set aside, with all consequential action also falling.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes the composition and mode of constitution of a selection body in mandatory terms, the authority must act strictly in that manner, and any action taken by a committee constituted in deviation from the statute is a nullity.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
