Back
1990 Supreme(SC) 865
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.B. Sawant, K. Ramaswamy, JJ.
U.P. Higher Education Services Commission - Appellant
Versus
Dr. Leena Khare and others - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5217 of 1990 with Civil Appeal Nos. 5218-5222 of 1990
Decided On : 24-10-1990
Subsequent alteration in eligibility by change of rules cannot affect the steps taken on the basis of the earlier advertisement merely on the ground that the process of selection has taken time to be completed.
Headnote:
Delay in Selection Process - Eligibility Change - Summary: The court considered whether delay in completing the selection process and subsequent change in eligibility would render the selections made on the basis of the earlier advertisement bad. The court held that subsequent alteration in eligibility by change of rules cannot affect the steps taken on the basis of the earlier advertisement merely on the ground that the process of selection has taken time to be completed. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the orders of the High Court, and sustained the selections.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a delay in completing the selection process and subsequent change in eligibility of candidates due to alteration of the law. The High Court quashed the selections and required a fresh advertisement to be issued, but permitted the earlier applicants to be considered in the fresh selection.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the delay in completing the selection process and subsequent change in eligibility did not render the selections made on the basis of the earlier advertisement bad. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the orders of the High Court, and sustained the selections.
Issues: The key issue was whether delay in completing the selection process and subsequent change in eligibility would render the selections made on the basis of the earlier advertisement bad.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that subsequent alteration in eligibility by change of rules cannot affect the steps taken on the basis of the earlier advertisement merely on the ground that the process of selection has taken time to be completed.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals, set aside the orders of the High Court, and sustained the selections. There was no order for costs.
JUDGMENT :
P.B. Sawant and K. Ramaswamy, JJ. - Special leave granted.
2. Heard counsel for U. P. Higher Education Services Commission as also the affected teachers who had been selected as lecturers for the respective posts. The short point involved in these appeals is as to whether if there had been delay in completing the process of selection and in trial meantime the eligibility of candidates is changed by alteration of the law, the selection made on the basis of applications received within the last date indicated in the advertisement would be rendered bad. The High Court has held that it would be and therefore, has quashed the selections and has required a fresh advertisement to be issued. It has, however, permitted the earlier applicants to be considered in the fresh selection.
2. It is not disputed that the advertisement pursuant to which the selection process was undertaken had fixed a last date on the basis of which eligibility had to be tested. Subsequent alteration in the eligibility by change of rules cannot affect the steps taken on the basis of the earlier advertisement merely on the ground that the process of selection has taken time to be completed. We allow the appeals, set aside the orders of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court and sustain the selections.
3. It is unfortunate that the selection commission has taken more than two years to complete the selections. There is a distinction between the State Public Service Commission and the appellant-commission. The appellant-commission is a special commission set up for specific purpose of making selections in a limited field. We are cognizant of the fact that the State of Uttar Pradesh is a large one with many institutions and the field of selection is large. Even then the Commission should have taken adequate care to ensure completion of the selection within reasonable time. We would have dismissed the appeals of the selection commission on this sole ground if affected candidates had not come before us.
4. There shall be no order for costs.
Appeals allowed.
