B. RAMANJINI AND ORS. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.

Citation: [2002] 3 S.C.R. 506 · Decided: 26-04-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B. RAMANJINI AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR. 
APRIL 26, 2002 
B 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND DORAISWAMY RAW, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Examination for recruitment-Cancellation of by Government after 
C enquiry-High Court held that examination could not have been cancel/ed-
On appeal-Held, examinations rightly cancelled-Undue interference of 
Courts with action of the Government not warranted. 
Recruitment-Selection challenged on the ground of non-observation of 
'carry forward' system in reservation-Validity of Government notification 
D providing reduction in minimum qualifying marks questioned-Petitioners were 
not affected parties-Non-impleadment of selected candidates-High Court 
not disturbing the selection as having been completed, and holding 'carry 
--\. 
forward' system as not applicable in the facts of the case-However, directions 
·issued regarding 'carry forward' system of reservation-On appeal, Held, 
E High Court's interference not justified in the absence of selected candidates 
and since the petition was not maintainable as the same not filed by affected 
persons nor the matter involved public interest-Direction by High Court not 
warranted since for future no particular principle could be set out in a judgment 
of the nature where nothing has been decided. 
F 
Constitution of India-Article 226-Directions by High Court relating 
to Scheme of Administrative Tribunals Act, I 985 and fixing time limit for 
constitution of nodal agency as directed in L. Chandra Kumar's case-
Propriety of-Held, directions were not called for since Supreme Court has 
explained the scheme and it is seized of the matter. 
G 
Civil Appeal No. 6461 of 1998 
Written examination of District Selection Committee (DSC) in Anantpur 
District were cancelled by State Government on recommendation of Collector 
on the basis of report of Superintendent of Police pointing out various 
irregularities in conduct of the examination. Examinations were held afresh. 
I-I 
506 
• 
,. 
B. RAMAN HNI v. STA TE 
507 
Results were announced. 
Respondent No. 5 who could not qualify in the subsequent examination 
filed original application before Central Administrative Tribunal for 
declaration that the subsequent DSC written tests in Anantpur District were 
arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 21 and sought direction to declare 
A 
appropriate results. 
B 
Tribunal held that main relief to declare the result had become 
infructuous and in as much as Government had already cancelled the 
examination, inquiry into various lapses was not required. 
Respondent No. 5 thereafter filed writ petition before High Court C 
contending that the cancellation of examination was not legally acceptable as 
the same was only on the basis of news paper report and not on any other 
material; that the circumstances and material for cancellation of examinations 
were similar to other districts and following the analogy of Aantpur District, 
examinations in all the districts should have been cancelled. 
Report of the Superintendent and recommendation of Collector were 
not placed before High Court High Court held that the examination could 
not have been cancelled as there was no distinction between Anantpur District 
and other districts. Hence the instant appeal. 
C.A. Nos. 894 of 1999 and 3094-3ll0 of 2002. 
High Court while dealing with appointment of teachers in a writ petition, 
issued directions witi. regard to Scheme of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 
viz. the tenure of office of the members, Chairman and Vice Chairman of 
Central Administrative Tribunal, manner of filling up the vacancies therein 
and fixed time limit for constitution of nodal agency as directed in L. Chandra 
Kumar's c3se. 
In appeal, issue for consideration was whether High Court was justified 
in issuing direction, particularly relating to the scheme of the Act. 
C.A. No. 3093 of 2002. 
In appointment process of Secondary Grade Teachers, Government 
issued notification providing for reduction of minimum qualifying marks in 
order to ensure filling up all posts. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
On the allegation of leakage of question papers and mass copying, H 
508 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2002] 3 S.C.R. 
A examinations were cancelled in one district, while it was not cancelled in other 
districts and the candidates were selected. 
Writ petitions were filed questioning the selection on: the basis of 
irregularities. Constitutional validity of notification providing reduction of 
minimum qualifying m

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.