Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Case Briefs - Admin

    Uploaded by

    Dev Sharma
    30 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court of India quashed the appointment of the director of the Indian Statistical Institute. The court ruled that the institute, as an organization controlled and funded by the central government, must comply with its own bylaws in making appointments. Specifically, it must publicize vacancies to allow wider consideration of candidates. Before appointing a new director, the institute must publicly advertise the open position. The court also affirmed that as an instrumentality of the central government, the institute is subject to constitutional obligations of equality and fairness in its hiring practices.

    Original Description:

    Case briefs_ admin

    Original Title

    Case briefs_ admin

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court of India quashed the appointment of the director of the Indian Statistical Institute. The court ruled that the institute, as an organization controlled and funded by the central government, must comply with its own bylaws in making appointments. Specifically, it must publicize vacancies to allow wider consideration of candidates. Before appointing a new director, the institute must publicly advertise the open position. The court also affirmed that as an instrumentality of the central government, the institute is subject to constitutional obligations of equality and fairness in its hiring practices.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    30 views2 pages

    Case Briefs - Admin

    Uploaded by

    Dev Sharma
    The Supreme Court of India quashed the appointment of the director of the Indian Statistical Institute. The court ruled that the institute, as an organization controlled and funded by the central government, must comply with its own bylaws in making appointments. Specifically, it must publicize vacancies to allow wider consideration of candidates. Before appointing a new director, the institute must publicly advertise the open position. The court also affirmed that as an instrumentality of the central government, the institute is subject to constitutional obligations of equality and fairness in its hiring practices.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    B.S. MINHAS V.

    INDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE


    The Indian Statistical Institute was registered under the Societies Registration Act, and
    governed by the Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959. Its control is completely vested in the
    Union of India, respondent no.5 in the appeal. The Institute had been declared as an 'Institute of
    National Importance’. The respondent no. 2 the chief executive body of the institute which
    consisted of 25 members of which 3 were representatives of the Central Government.
    Respondent no.4 a director was appointed to discharge academic and administrative duties of the
    institute. The petitioner challenged the appointment of the respondent no. 4 on the grounds that
    he was much more highly qualified academically and had accomplishments and is far superior to
    the said respondent. In the writ petition it was contended that byelaw requires that the vacancy of
    the director should be publicized but it was not many were not aware of the vacancy until the
    appointment. No bio data or information of the candidates was given to the council.

    Held- The Supreme Court of India has quashed and has set aside the appointment of director of
    the Indian Institute of Statistics. Before respondent.1 tries to select a new director, it has to
    comply the requirement of byelaw by publicizing the vacancy of the post. The court also declare
    the respondent no.2 is an authority under and within the meaning of the Article 12 of the
    Constitution, therefore the writ petition is maintainable. The central government provides all the
    money required for the funding for the institute and the other source of money to the institute has
    to have the Central Government’s approval. The control of the Central Government is deep and
    pervasive and, therefore, it is an instrumentality of the Central Government and as such is an
    'authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. It is, therefore, subject to the
    constitutional obligations under Articles14 and 16 of the Constitution Ajay Hasia etc. v. Khalid
    Mujib Sehravardi & Ors. etc. [1981] 2 SCR 79. the court strictly ordered the respondent no. 1 to
    follow the byelaws as they have been constituted to avoid arbitrariness and conduct its affairs.
    The vacancy for the post of the director should had been publicized and it would have garnered
    wider people for eligibility and the council would have much larger field to choose for the post.

    Furthermore, the judgement also delves into Dicey’s Rule of Law wherein he had stated that 1)
    The supremacy of law: It means that the law is supreme and the Government cannot act
    arbitrarily. 2) Equality before Law: It means that all the people should be subject to the same

    1
    provisions of law which is administered by the ordinary courts of the land. 3) Constitution
    originates from the ordinary law: It means that the rights of the people are not granted by the
    constitution but instead it is the result of the law of the land which is administered by the courts.

    You might also like