Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. The process of selection was expedited for the reason that in one of the writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court directed the Commission to complete the process of regular selection within four months. The management of the colleges were directed to send the requisition within a week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The Court clarified that the direction to expedite the process of selection has been passed to avoid indiscipline in the institution and remove uncertainty from the minds of the teachers.

10. On 2nd April, 1997, the Commission sent a reply to the State Government that the selection process had commenced and it was not possible to stop the same in public interest. The Commission also intimated to the State Government that selection was being carried out in pursuance of the direction of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 19557 of 1996, whereby the Court had directed that the selection in respect of the vacancies existing in several institutions would be made and the State Government would make an endeavour to co-operate with the Commission so that the selection process be completed. The letter also indicated that the selection process was started in pursuance of the order of the High Court and if that would not be completed within the specified period, that would amount to contempt of courts.

13. It was asserted by the petitioners that the selection process had been completed and the result was declared on 9.4.1997. which was communicated in the candidates on 11.4.1997. It was urged that the direction issued by the State Government under the said notification dated 11.4.1997 was without jurisdiction inasmuch as the State Government was not vested with the power to Issue such a direction under Section 2 of Corporation Act, 1975. On 23.4.1997 the Commission sent its reply indicating the aforesaid facts as well as informed the State Government that the provisions of Corporation Act, 1975 have no application in respect of discharge of obligation, duty and function of the Commission as provided under Chapter III of the Commission Act.

28. It was averred that writ petitions were filed before the High Court. Allahabad in which the selection in pursuance of the advertisement Nos. 21 to 23 have been challenged, in some of the writ petitions interim orders have been issued staying the selection, in a public interest litigation hearing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29670 of 1996, the selection was challenged, but no interim order was passed. It was averred that the State Government was receiving complaints that selections were made on extraneous consideration. The Commission was losing its credibility and the selection was dubbed as force. in view of the aforesaid reasons, the State Government took a policy decision that selection be made by the Commission and issued the requisite direction on 1.4,1997, 11.4.1997, 2.6.1997 and 20.6.1997. The Commission instead of obeying the direction, preferred to defy the directions and completed the process of selection. According to the respondents, the direction can be issued not only under Section 2 of the Corporation Act. 1975, but also under Section 6 (3) of the Commission Act, which empowers the State Government to suspend from office any member in respect of whom any action is contemplated in this section.