https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288538 The SC treated the earlier direction for a High Powered Selection Committee as an advisory safeguard to secure Tribunal independence, not an inflexible mandatory invalidating appointments made after consultation with the Chief Justice of India. It also held that the appointments were not shown to be vitiated by fraud, bias, or procedural illegality, because the appointees were eligible and the High Court had relied too heavily on administrative file notings without giving an effective opportunity to respond. The quashing order was set aside, the writ petition was dismissed, and consequential service benefits were directed to follow. en-us Fri, 12 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:07:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288538 The SC treated the earlier direction for a High Powered Selection Committee as an advisory safeguard to secure Tribunal independence, not an inflexible mandatory invalidating appointments made after consultation with the Chief Justice of India. It also held that the appointments were not shown to be vitiated by fraud, bias, or procedural illegality, because the appointees were eligible and the High Court had relied too heavily on administrative file notings without giving an effective opportunity to respond. The quashing order was set aside, the writ petition was dismissed, and consequential service benefits were directed to follow. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288538