TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (12) TMI 455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso held by the Tribunal that the Selection Committee was not properly constituted as per the provisions of Regulation 3 of the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Regulations of 1955). Out of the bunch of petitions which were filed before the Karnataka High Court, two petitions were filed by the Union Public Service Commission ( hereinafter to be referred to as the Commission), first is that the Chairman of the Selection Committee, Shri Subir Dutta, Member, U.P.S.C. against whom the allegation of mala fide was leveled and it was upheld by the Tribunal, second one challenging the finding of the Tribunal that the Selection Committee was not properly constituted and the Selection Committee acted arbitrarily and in a discriminatory manner and awarded marks to the selected candidates. Another batch of petitions (seven in number) was filed by the selected candidates whose names were recommended for appointment to the I.A.S. and two writ petitions were filed by the persons who were not short-listed by the Screening Committee. Hence, all these petitions were clubbed together and were disposed of by the common ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of the Commission, as per the schedule referred to for the State, the following members shall also be the members of the Committee which includes the Chief Secretary to the Government; Additional Chief Secretary to the Government; Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department; Senior most Divisional Commissioner and two nominees of the Central Government. This Selection Committee after scrutiny of the records and calling for personal interview will prepare a list and recommend the names of the suitable candidates to the State Government concerned, which shall forward to the Commission for its approval along with the records of all members of the State Civil Service included in the list; the records of all members of the State Civil Service who are proposed to be superseded by the recommendations made in the list and the observations, if any, of the State Government on the recommendations of the Committee to the Central Government and the Central Government shall also forward their observations, if any, on the recommendations of the Committee to the Commission. Thereafter, the Commission as per Regulation 7 of 1997 shall consider the list prepared by the Committee; observa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Selection Committee for selection because of the order passed by the Tribunal. Thus, in total names of 41 persons were sent for consideration against eight vacancies. The Selection Committee after scrutinizing the cases and after interviewing 39 candidates selected eight candidates and two candidates remained absent. Though a petition was filed before the Tribunal by one person who was not selected and stay order was obtained that was challenged before the High Court and the High Court allowed the writ petition and vacated the interim order passed by the Tribunal staying the selection and permitted the selection to be taken to its logical conclusion subject to the condition that the order passed by the Tribunal shall be subject to challenge before this Court. Then one Special Leave Petition was filed before this Court against the order passed by the Division Bench vacating the stay order passed by the Tribunal that Special Leave Petition was dismissed on 23.7.2004. Thereafter, the matter was finally heard by the Tribunal and the Tribunal set aside the selection of eight selected candidates of the Karnataka cadre to the I.A.S. The Tribunal was of the view that the Selection Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the former Chief Secretary to the Government, Shri B.S.Patil has shown a great interest. Therefore, on account of this favouritism was shown to respondents 5 to 12 before the Tribunal, the applicants before the Tribunal have been denied their legitimate selection and therefore, in sum total, the allegation of mala fide against Shri Subir Dutta is that a site was allotted to him to appease him and secure favourable selection in respect of Respondents 5 to 12. The High Court in order to verify the element of truth sent for the original file relating to the allotment of residential site to Shri Subir Dutta from Bangalore Development Authority wherein it is noted that on 11.4.2003 a note was placed by Shri B.S.Patil, the Chief Secretary, to the Chief Minister making a request that a site be allotted to Shri Subir Dutta as he has attachment to the State of Karnataka and he has been helpful both for selecting Bangalore for bi- annual Air Shows and for grant of defence land for the purpose of road network in Bangalore. For that on 17.4.2003 the Chief Minister approved the proposal of the Chief Secretary for allotment of a residential site to Shri Subir Dutta who was at that time the Defe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rongly reject the allegation of mala fide against Shri Subir Dutta, the Chairman of the Selection Committee. 7. So far as the allegation of mala fide against Shri B.S.Patil is concerned, he was not impleaded as a party. Therefore, the allegation of mala fide could not be entertained by the Tribunal. As such, the allegation of mala fide against Shri B.S.Patil could not be taken into consideration and rightly so, by the High Court as well as by the Tribunal. The allegation of mala fide is very easy to be levelled and it is very difficult to substantiate it, specially in the matter of selection or whoever is involved in the decision making process. People are prone to make such allegation but the Courts owe a duty to scrutinize the allegation meticulously because the person who is making the allegation of animous sometimes bona fidely or sometimes mala fidely due to his non-selection. He has a vested interest. Therefore, unless the allegations are substantiated beyond doubt, till that time the Court cannot draw its conclusion. Therefore, we reject the allegation of mala fide. 8. Now, coming to the constitution of the Selection Committee and the selection undertaken by the Committee,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tee like the Court of appeal. This discretion has been given to the Selection Committee only and Courts rarely sit in court of appeal to examine the selection of the candidates nor is the business of the Court to examine each candidate and record its opinion. In this connection, learned senior counsel for the appellants has taken us through various following decisions of this Court. (i) AIR 2003 SC 3044 Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. (ii) (1993) 3 SCC 319 P.M.Bayas V. Union of India & Ors. (iii) (1985) 4 SCC 417 Ashok Kumar Yadav & Ors. V. State of Haryana & Ors. Etc. (iv) (1981) 1 SCC 722 Ajay Hasia & Ors. V.Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors. (v) 2007 (3) SCALE 219 Union Public Service Commission v.S.Thiagarajan & Ors. Mr.P.P.Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for the private respondents invited our attention to the following decisions of this Court. (i) (1976) 3 SCC 583 Dr.G.Sarana V. University of Lucknow & Ors. (ii) (1980) @ SCC 355 Mrs. Kunda S.Kadam v. Dr.K.K.Soman & Ors. (iii) (2002) 1 SCC 749 Ashok Nagar Welfare Association & Anr. V R.K.Sharma & Ors. Learned Senior Counsel for the Commission invited our atten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... records and 50 marks were allotted for interview. It was also decided by the Commission that the candidates would be eligible for selection only if they secure 50% marks in each of the two components i.e. 25 marks in the scrutiny of the service records and 25 marks in the interview. The Commission has further laid down the norms for awarding marks for the scrutiny of service records. 10 marks are awarded to a candidate if on an assessment of service record he was found to be outstanding, 8 marks if the service record was found to be very good and 5 marks if it was good. Candidates who have failed to secure 25 marks in the interview were not held to be qualified. Similarly, the candidates who failed to secure 25 marks on the basis of the service records were also not held to be eligible. However, on facts no person was rejected on the ground that he failed to secure 25 marks either on the basis of the service records or on the basis of interview. The Tribunal while scrutinizing the records sent by the Selection Committee set aside the selection of eight candidates namely Sarvashri Anwar Pasha and K.Ramanna Naik, who according to the Tribunal were wrongly selected. The block period ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Selection Committee. More so, if the ACRS are not written or reviewed, then the incumbent is not responsible for it and why should he suffer on account of that. The authority who is under obligation to complete the formalities having failed to do so till the lapse of time why the incumbent should be punished. We fail to appreciate the submissions of the parties before the Tribunal and the view taken by the Tribunal also. It was also pointed that the operation of the Rules of 1999 was stayed by the Tribunal, that may be so. But even thereafter also when the Rules of 2000 have repealed the Rules of 1994, then what turns on the stay order granted by the Tribunal and we cannot hold the incumbent responsible for it and deprive him the due consideration if there is failure on the part of the officers to discharge their duties in writing the ACRs, the incumbent should not be allowed to suffer. Therefore, we are of opinion that it is not a case in which there was any statutory breach of Rules committed by the Selection Committee in taking into consideration the ACRs of Shri Anwar Pasha. In the case of another candidate i.e. Shri K.Ramanna Naik, his confidential reports for the years 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessed to be very good without there being any basis for it. This was found by the Tribunal to be patently arbitrary. It is the selection process and what prevailed with the Committee after review of the annual confidential reports of all these officers cannot be dilated in writing. When the Selection Committee sits and considers the candidature of both the officers and in case of both the officers, looking at the 5 years annual confidential reports, one is found to be over all outstanding and the other is found to be over all very good, this marking of the Selection Committee cannot be interfered with in extraordinary jurisdiction or even by the Tribunal. We fail to understand how the Tribunal can sit as an appellate authority to call for the personal records and constitute selection committee to undertake this exercise. This power is not given to the Tribunal and it should be clearly understood that the assessment of the Selection Committee is not subject to appeal either before the Tribunal or by the Courts. One has to give credit to the Selection Committee for making their assessment and it is not subject to appeal. Taking the over all view of the ACRs of the candidates, one m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmittee erred in taking into account the non-existent adverse remarks does not necessarily mean that the respondent should have been categorized or considered as very good vis-`-vis others who were also in the field of choice. How to categorize in the light of the relevant records and what norms to apply in making the assessment are exclusively the functions of the Selection Committee. This function had to be discharged by the Selection Committee by applying the same norm and tests and the selection was also to be made by the Selection Committee as per the relevant rules. The powers to make selection were vested unto the Selection Committee under the relevant rules and the Tribunal could not have played the role which the Selection Committee had to play by making conjectures and surmises. The proper order for the Tribunal to pass under the circumstances was to direct the Selection Committee to reconsider the merits of the respondent vis-`-vis the official who was junior to him. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136 in this respect is, however, wider and cannot be equated with that of the Tribunal. 13. Our attention was invited to a decision of this Court in Da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the State Government to make recruitment under the Regulations. In the face of clear pleadings on the record the Tribunal was not justified in holding that there as no material on the record to show the existence of special circumstances. The Tribunal was wholly unjustified in asking the Central Government to show the existence of special circumstances in terms of Rule 8(2) of the Rules. As interpreted by us the scheme of the Rules and the Regulations clearly show that it is the State Government which has to be satisfied regarding the existence of special circumstances. 16. Our attention was invited to a decision of this Court in Anil Katiyar (Mrs.) v. Union of India & Ors. [(1997) 1 SCC 280], it was observed as follows: The question is whether the action of the DPC in grading appellant as very good can be held to be arbitrary. Shri G.L.Sanghi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Union Public Service Commission, has placed before us the confidential procedure followed by the DPCs in the Union Public Service Commission for giving overall gradings, including that of outstanding, to an officer. Having regard to the said confidential procedure which is followed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cers in the State have been found to be outstanding. But the Selection Committee downgraded the assessment to very good and this has provided grounds to the Tribunal to interfere with the selection of others. The Selection Committee normally abides by the assessment made by the reporting officer and the reviewing authority. But the Selection Committee is not powerless. After reviewing the candidates performance, the Selection Committee can certainly make its own assessment. The guidelines which have been issued by the Commission also enables the Selection Committee to assess the remarks made by the reporting officer or the reviewing officer and after taking into consideration various factors like the meritorious work done or any punishment or adverse remarks made or subsequently expunged on representation can review the assessment about the candidates. Such review of the assessment is fully within the competence of the Selection Committee and in this connection the observations of this Court may be relevant in Ramanand Prasad Singh & Anr. V. Union of India & Ors. Etc. [(1996) 4 SCC 64], which reads as under : The Committee applies its mind to the service records and makes i....