IMPORTANT POINT
Merely because minutes of the Special Committee constituted for appointment as Secretaries to the Government of India do not contain the reasons for non-selection of the respondent does not mean that there has been no proper consideration of the merits and the suitability of the candidate and as a result the selection is vitiated.

JUDGMENT

S.C. Agrawal, J.-Special leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ). It relates to empanelment and appointment on the post of Secretary to the Government of India or equivalent post. Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent ) is a member of the Indian Administrative Service (I.A.S.) belonging to 1962 batch. In February 1990 he was promoted as Additional Secretary. In 1993 a Special Committee consisting of the Cabinet Secretary, the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary prepared a panel of I.A.S. officers of 1962 batch for appointment as Secretaries to the Government of India or equivalent post. The said panel was considered by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (for short ACC ) of the Government of India and appointments were made on the posts of Secretaries in March 1993. The respondent was not empanelled and hence he was not appointed as Secretary. Feeling aggrieved by the said non-inclusion in the panel, he filed a petition (O.A. No. 539 of 1994) before the Tribunal which has been allowed by the impugned judgment dated May 14, 1996. The Tribunal has declared that the action of the appellants in omitting the name of the respondent from the panel prepared for appointment to the post of Secretary to the Government of India or equivalent post without proper consideration of his case is arbitrary, unsustainable and void and has directed the appellants to consider the suitability of the respondent for empanelment and appointment on the post of Secretary to the Government of India or equivalent post afresh as on the date on which respondents Nos. 2 to 10 herein were considered for empanelment after taking into account Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of the respondent for the relevant period and other relevant facts and materials in the light of the guidelines contained in paragraph 14 of the Central Staffing Scheme and, if on such consideration the respondent is found suitable, the Tribunal has directed the appellants to consider his appointment on one such-post.

3. The Central Staffing Scheme, as contained in the Office Memorandum dated July 15, 1992 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training), prescribes the procedure for selection for appointment of officers to Secretarial posts of and above the rank of Under Secretary to the Government of India and to certain important non-Secretarial posts. Paragraph 14 of the said Scheme relates to the posts of Additional Secretary/Special Secretary/Secretary and reads as under :

"14. Selection for inclusion on the panel of officers adjudged suitable for appointment to the posts of Additional Secretary or Special Secretary/Secretary to the Government of India and posts equivalent thereto, will be approved by the ACC on the basis of proposals submitted by the Cabinet Secretary. In this task, the Cabinet Secretary may be assisted by a Special Committee of Secretaries for drawing up proposals for the consideration of ACC. As far as possible, panels of suitable officers will be drawn up on an annual basis considering all officers of a particular year of allotment from one service together as a group. Inclusion in such panels will be through the process of strict selection and evaluation of such qualities as merit, competence, leadership and a flair for participating in the policy-making process. Posts at these levels at the Centre filled according to the Central Staffing Scheme are not to be considered as posts for the betterment of promotion prospects of any service. The needs of the Central Government would be the paramount consideration. While due regard would be given to seniority, filling up of any specific post would be based on merit, competence and the specific suitability of the officer for a particular vacancy in