2012 Supreme(Bom) 2382

In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
S.J. VAZIFDAR, F.M. REIS, JJ.
Daulatrao V. Rane Sardessai & Others
Versus
The State of Goa through the Chief Secretary & Others
Writ Petition Nos. 568 of 2012 & 616 of 2012
Decided on : 21-12-2012

Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320 - Selection process.

       Government loss power to entertain complaints regarding interview process adopted by Commission and to decide whether there is substance in grievance and can reject selection list and order fresh selection. - It is, however, not for the Court to analyze these marks or come to a conclusion as to whether there was any abnormality or not. Whether there was a cloud on the process or not is for the Government to decide. It is not necessary for the Government to conclusively determine that the process was fraudulent or even unfair. It is sufficient if there is a reasonable and bona fide suspicion in the matter.

       It is for the Government to decide whether in a given case complaints regarding the interview process have any substance. If the Government, after considering all the facts, comes to the conclusion that there is some substance in the grievance or complaint or allegation it is within its right not to accept the recommendation of the GPSC and to order the selection process to be undertaken de novo . This is especially so as the appointment once made to the public office continues for several years.

       It is not necessary for the Government to order an investigation before refusing to accept the recommendation of the GPSC. It is for the Government to decide whether or not to institute a formal investigation. In the event of the Government deciding t o investigate the matter it is for the Government to decide upon the nature and extent of the investigat ion. The Government is entitled to make its own enquiries and to assess the material itself. It is not bound to order an independent investigation in every case before taking a decision whether or not to accept the select list recommended by the Commission.

       The inquiry does not have to be one conducted by any other agency or person. The Government can conduct its own inquiry so long as it is fair and reasonable.

       It is impossible to hold that the State’s stand is "fraught with arbitrariness". It is not necessary for the Government pursuant to an investigation or even on its own to come to a conclusive finding of fraud, favouritism or any other defect in the process of selection. It is sufficient if the Government bona fide comes to the conclusion that there is a reasonable doubt about the process. Otherwise, it would be difficult in certain cases such as where appointments are required to be made urgently and cannot await the outcome of investigation for the Government to function. Appointments to such posts may, in certain cases, be indefinitely delayed pending a formal investigation by an independent agency or by the Government itself. The Government is the best judge as to whether it is possible or feasible to wait the outcome of an investigation or not.

       Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320 - Selection process.

       Mere receipt of complaints, from candidates, in respect of selection process, cannot justify select list being rejected. - The mere receipt of complaints cannot justify the select list being rejected. It is necessary to ascertain whether the complaints were at all considered by the Government. If it is found that the complaints were considered and analyzed the Governments assessment therefore ought not to be interfered with lightly. Even assuming that the Court perceives or assesses the situation differently it ought not to substitute it’s assessment for that of the Government.

       Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320 - Selection process.

       Subject to a bar implied or express to shortlist, a Commission is entitled to shortlist a candidate. - Subject to a bar implied or express to shortlist, a Commission is entitled to shortlist a candidate. The mode of shorlisting must be fair and reasonable. Whether it is so or not would depend upon the facts of the case. In the instant case Goa Public Service Commission proceeded on the basis that it was necessary to resort to shortlisting as it would be difficult to interview all the applicants.

       It was entitled to do so. While the Rules and Regulations did not authorize the GPSC to resort to shorlisting, they did not prohibit the GPSC from so either. They did not contain any reference to shortlisting. Fixing minimum marks is only one of the possible ways of shortlisting.

       Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320 - Select list of candidates.

       Mere entry of name of a candidate in select list, not gives him a right to be appointed, even though vacancies to be filled, exist. - It is settled law that the mere entry of the name of a candidate in the select list does not give him a right to be appointed, even though vacancies to be filled exist. The Government is not bound to make the appointments. It may refuse to do so for valid reasons including financial constraints or administrative exigencies.

       Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320 - Selection process.

       Mere fact that a candidate is selected in preference to another although he secured lower marks at written examination would not indicate any mala fide or impropriety in selection process. - It is indeed not always that a person who scores high marks at the written examination does as well as in the interview and vice-versa. The importance of an interview can never be undermined. It often helps in appointing the most suitable candidate for the post. It happens ever so often that a candidate who scores lower marks in the written examination is found to be more suitable for a post than the one who secured higher marks at the written examination. This is a subjective fact dependent considerably upon the perception of the interview panel. Thus, the mere fact that a candidate is selected in preference to another although he scored lower marks at the written examination would not indicate any mala fides or impropriety in the selection process.

       Goa Civil Services Rules, 1997 - Rules 7 and 9 - Competitive examination.

       A competitive examination, not refers only a written examination but it includes oral test (interview) and practical tests or a combination thereof.

       Goa Public Service Commission (Rules of Procedure), 1988 - Rules 12(3) and 12(4) - Selection process.

       Where there are large number of qualified candidates, only some are chosen on basis of stipulated parameters then shortlisting amongst qualified candidates is an entirely different exercise from prescribing minimum of qualifications. - The difference between prescribing minimum qualifications and shortlisting candidates is this. Shortlisting candidates is from among candidates who are qualified. In other words, for the purpose of administrative convenience in certain circumstances such as where there are a large number of qualified candidates, only some are chosen on the basis of the stipulated parameters. Shortlisting is, therefore, from amongst qualified candidates. That is an entirely different exercise from prescribing a qualification.