Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJI., P.N. BHAGWATI, V.R. KRISHNA IYER, S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND A.D. KOSHAL, JJ.
Ajay Hasia etc. Petitioners
Versus
Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and others etc., Respondents.
W.P. Nos. 1304, 1262, 1119, 1118, 1574-75, 1373-74, 1244-45, 1230, 1494-97, 1566-67, 1143, 1440, 1586, 1420-23, 1441-43, 1389, 1144, 1461, 1437-39, 1431, 1268, 1145, 1263 and 1331 of 1979, D/- 13-11-1980.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Anil Dev Singh, Mr. Lalit Kumar Gupta, Mr. Subhash Sharma, Mr. C. P. Pandey and S. K. Sabharwal, Advocates (in 1389, 1437-39, 1262, 1497, 1586, 1230 and 1263), Mr. Y.S.Chitale, Sr. Advocate (in 1145/79), Mr. P. N. Duda, Advocate in 1494/79, M/s. V. K. Pandita and R. Satish, Advocates, Mr. E. C. Agarwala, Advocate (in 1241-43, 1495-96, 1566-67, 1423, 1143-44, 1118-19, 1494, 1145, 1331); Mr. S. K. Bisaria, Advocate (in 1461/79) Mr. Rishikesh, Advocate and B. Datta, Advocate (in 1373-74, 1304 & 1431), Mr. Y. S.Chitale, Sr. Advocate Mr. D. N. Tiku, Mr. E. C. Agarwala, Mr. M.Mudgal, Mr. Ashok Kaul and Mr. Vineet Kumar, Advocates (in 1244-45, 1420-22 and 1440), and Mr. S. S. Khanduja, Advocates (in 1268, 1574-75), for Petitioners; Mr. S. N. Kacker, Sr. Advocate Mr. Altaf Ahmed, Advocate for the appearing Respondents.
Based on the provided legal document, the following key points can be summarized:
The legal challenge pertains to the validity of the admission process at a government-sponsored engineering college, which is considered an "authority" under the meaning of constitutional provisions, particularly Article 12 of the Constitution of India (!) (!) .
The admission procedure involved a written entrance test and a viva voce (oral interview), with the latter allocated a significant proportion of marks, which raised concerns about arbitrariness and fairness (!) (!) .
The allocation of marks for the oral interview was notably high, constituting about one-third of the total marks, which was deemed unreasonable and potentially arbitrary, especially given the criticisms of the subjective nature of interviews and their susceptibility to bias and manipulation (!) (!) .
The manner in which the oral interviews were conducted—short durations of only 2-3 minutes per candidate, with questions limited to formalities regarding parentage and residence—was considered inadequate for a proper assessment of the candidates' suitability (!) (!) .
The procedure for admission, including the reliance on an oral interview, was challenged on the grounds of violating the principles of equality and non-arbitrariness as enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution (!) (!) .
The court acknowledged the criticisms of the oral interview method, recognizing its subjective and impressionistic nature but also noting its continued acceptance as a supplementary tool for assessing personal traits, provided it is conducted fairly and with appropriate safeguards (!) (!) .
The court emphasized that the allocation of a disproportionately high percentage of marks to the oral interview, especially when the interview was superficial and brief, rendered the process arbitrary and violative of constitutional principles (!) .
Despite the identified flaws, the court refrained from invalidating the admissions for the specific academic year under consideration, citing practical considerations such as the hardship of re-opening admissions already completed and the passage of time (!) .
The court cautioned that future admission procedures should allocate a reasonable proportion of marks for oral interviews, ideally not exceeding 15%, and that interviews should be conducted thoroughly and relevantly, possibly with tape-recording to ensure transparency and fairness (!) .
Overall, the decision underscores the importance of reasonableness, transparency, and adherence to constitutional principles in the formulation and execution of admission procedures by authorities, especially when such procedures involve subjective assessments like interviews (!) (!) .
The court also highlighted that authorities must avoid arbitrariness and ensure that selection methods are rational, fair, and non-discriminatory, aligning with the constitutional mandate of equality before the law (!) (!) .
The judgment emphasizes that authorities acting as instruments or agencies of the state are bound by constitutional limitations, including fundamental rights, and must operate within the framework of legality and fairness (!) (!) .
Please note that the summary is based solely on the content provided and avoids specific case law references, focusing instead on the legal principles and findings relevant to the issue.
Judgment
BHAGWATI J.:- These writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution challenge the validity of the admissions made to the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar for the academic year 1979-80.
2. The Regional Engineering College, Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as the College) is one of the fifteen Engineering. Colleges in the country sponsored by the Government of India. The College is established and its administration and management are carried on by a Society registered under the Jammu and Kashmir Registration of Societies Act, 1898. The Memorandum of Association of the Society in clause 3 sets out the objects for which the Society is incorporated and they include amongst other things establishment of the college with a view to providing instruction and research in such branches of engineering and technology as the college may think fit and for the advancement of learning and knowledge in such branches : Vide sub-cl. (i). The Society is empowered by clause 3 sub-cl. (ii) of the Memorandum of Association to make rules for the conduct of the affairs of the Society and to add, to amend, vary or rescind them from time to time with the approval of the Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir State (hereinafter referred to as the State Government) and the Central Government. Clause 3 sub-clause (iii) of the Memorandum of Association confers power on the Society to acquire and hold property in the name of the State Government. Sub-clause (v) of clause 3. of the Memorandum of Association contemplates that monies for running the college would be provided by the State and Central Governments and sub-cl. (vi) requires the Society to deposit all monies credited to its fund in such banks or to invest them in such manner as the Society may, with the approval of the State Government decide. The accounts of the Society as certified by a duly appointed auditor are mandatorily required by sub-clause (ix) of clause 3 of the Memorandum of Association to be forwarded annually to the State and Central Governments. Clause 6 of the Memorandum of Association empowers the State Government to appoint one or more persons to review the working and progress of the Society, or the college and to hold inquiries into the affairs thereof and to make a report and on receipt of any such report, the State Government has power, with the approval of the Central Government, to take such action and issue such directions as it may consider necessary in respect of any of the matters dealt with in the report and the Society or the College, as the case may be is bound to comply with such directions. There is a provision made in clause 7 of the Memorandum of Association that in case the Society or the College is not functioning properly, the State Government, will have the power to take over the administration and assets of the college with the prior approval of the Central Government. The founding members of the Society are enumerated in clause 9 of the Memorandum of Association and they are the Chairman to be appointed by the State Government with the approval of the Central Government, two representatives of the State Government, one representative of the Central Government, two representatives of the All India Council for Technical Education to be nominated by the Northern Regional Committee, one representative of the University of Jammu and Kashmir, one non-official representative of each of the Punjab, Rajasthan, U. P. and Jammu and Kashmir States to be appointed by the respective Governments in consultation with the Central Government and the Principal who shall also be the ex-officio Secretary.
3. The Rules of the Society are also important as they throw light on the nature of the Society. Rule 3 clause (i) reiterates the composition of the Society as set out in clause 9 of the Memorandum of Association and clause (ii) of that Rule provides that the State and the Central Governments may by mutual consultation at any time appoint any other person or persons to be m
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
