http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: DURGA DEVI & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF H.P. & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       11/04/1997

BENCH: A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: Present:                Hon’ble Dr. Justice A.S. Anand                Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.T. Thomas J.S. Attri and Devendra Singh, Advs. for the appellants T. Sridharan and P.D. Sharma, Advs. for the Respondents                          O R D E R      The following order of the Court was delivered:      Leave granted.      The appellants  were appointed as Voluntary Teachers on tenure basis  under the  Voluntary Teachers  Primary  Scheme 1991. Respondent  No.4 challenged  their  appointment  inter alia on the ground that he was academically more meritorious than the  appellants and  therefore the  selection Committee was not  justified in  preferring the appellants to him. The State Administrative  Tribunal Allowed the application filed by  Respondent   No.4  and  quashed  the  selection  of  the appellants by  itself judging  the comparative merits of the candidates. The  appellants have put that order of the state Administrative Tribunal dated 10th December  1992  in issue.      In Dalpat  Abasaheb Solunke  etc.  etc.  Vs.  Dr.  B.S. Mahajan etc.  etc. (AIR 1990 SC 434) while dealing with some what an identical question, this Court opined:      "It is  needless to  emphasise that      it is not the function of the Court      to hear  appeals over the decisions      of the  selection Committees and to      scrutinize the  relative merits  of      the candidates. Whether a candidate      is fit for a particular post or not      has  to  be  decided  by  the  duly      constituted   Selection   Committee      which  has  the  expertise  on  the      subject.  The  court  has  no  such      expertise .  The  decision  of  the      Selection    Committee    can    be      interfered  with  only  on  limited      grounds,  such   as  illegality  or      patent material irregularity in the      constitution of  the  Committee  or      its   procedure    vitiating    the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    selection,  or  proved  mala  fides      affecting the  selection etc. It is      not disputed  that in  the  present      case the University had constituted      the  Committee  in  due  Compliance      with  the   relevant  status.   The      committee consisted  of experts and      it selected  the  candidates  after      going  through   all  the  relevant      material before  it, In  sitting in      appeal over  the selection  so made      and in  setting  it  aside  on  the      ground of the so called comparative      merits   of   the   candidates   as      assessed by  the  Court,  the  High      Court went  wrong and  exceeded its      jurisdiction."      In the  instant case, as would be seen from the perusal of the  impugned order,  the selection of the appellants has been quashed  by the  Tribunal by  itself  scrutinising  the comparative merits  of the  candidates and  fitness for  the post as  if the  Tribunal  was  Sitting    as  an  appellate authority over the selection Committee. The selection of the candidates was not quashed on any other ground. The Tribunal fell in error in arrogating to itself the power to judge the comparative  merits  of  the  candidates  and  consider  the fitness  and  suitability  for  appointment.  That  was  the function of the selection committee. The observation of this Court  in  Dalapt  Abasaheb  Solunke’s  case  (supra  )  are squarely attracted  to the  facts of  the present  case. The order of  the Tribunal  Under the  circumstances  cannot  be sustained. The  appeal succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated  10th December  , 1992 is quashed and the matter is remitted  to the  Tribunal for  a fresh disposal on other points in accordance with the law after hearing the parties.      We are  informed  that  both  the  appellants  and  the contesting respondent  are in  service. They  shall  not  be disturbed till  the matter  is finally  disposed of  by  the Tribunal.      The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.