Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE KULDIP SINGH AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.
BHAGWANTI AND OTHERS
Versus
SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD, HARYANA AND ANOTHER
Civil Appeal No. ... of 1993{Arising out of SLP(C) No, 16095 of 1993}
Decided on 22-11-1993
Selection Process - Lady Social Workers - The court set aside the selection and appointments on the ground that the selected candidates and those issued appointment letters were not heard before the High Court, violating the principle of audi alteram partem.
Fact of the Case:
The Subordinate Services Selection Board in Haryana selected 48 candidates for appointment as Lady Social Workers, out of which 26 were offered appointments. The selection and appointments were challenged on the grounds of sham selection process due to large number of candidates being interviewed in a short span of time.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court set aside the selection and appointments without hearing the concerned parties, violating the principle that no order to the detriment of a person can be passed without hearing them. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order of the High Court was set aside.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the selection process and appointments, and whether the concerned parties were heard before the High Court's decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle of audi alteram partem, stating that no order to the detriment of a person can be passed without hearing them.
Final Decision: The writ petition filed by the respondents before the High Court was dismissed, and the impugned order of the High Court was set aside. No costs were awarded.
ORDER
1. Special leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The Subordinate Services Selection Board, Haryana selected 48 candidates for appointment as Lady Social Workers. Out of the selected candidates 26 were offered appointments. The selection and the appointments were challenged before the High Court on the ground that the Selection Committees interviewed large number of candidates in a short span of time and as such the selection was a sham affair. The specific allegation was that as many as 687 candidates were interviewed by two Selection Committees on one and the same day.
3. It is obvious from the impugned order of the High Court that in the writ petition before it only the Subordinate Services Selection Board was impleaded as a party. Neither the selected candidates nor those who were issued appointment letters were impleaded as parties before the High Court. The High Court set aside the selection and the appointments without hearing the persons concerned. It is settled proposition of law that no order to the detriment of a person can be passed without hearing him. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court on this short ground. The writ petition filed by the respondents before the High Court is thus dismissed. No Costs.
For Citation: 1995 Supp (2) SCC 663
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
