BIJU K.K. versus COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI & ORS.

Citation: [2022] 7 S.C.R. 596 · Decided: 11-07-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
596
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
BIJU K.K.
v.
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
KOCHI & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 4144 of 2022)
JULY 11, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Service Law – Non-consideration of a specific plea by the
High Court – Appellant was serving as Technical Assistant Grade -
II on daily wages in school of Engineering – He applied for the
post of Technical Assistant Grade -II in terms of notification issued
by the respondent University – He was placed much below in the
rank list by Selection Committee as he was awarded less marks on
experience ignoring his earlier services rendered as daily wagers –
Decision of Selection Committee was challenged and plea was raised
that the original respondent no.6 was also lacking the eligibility
criteria – Single Judge of High Court held that Selection Committee
decision is not arbitrary and Court cannot exercise power of judicial
review – Appeal against the decision of Single Judge was dismissed
by the Division Bench of the High Court – Held: The decision of
the Selection Committee was challenged and therefore, the High
Court was not justified in not deciding the same on merits on the
ground that when the Selection Committee has taken a decision, in
exercise of powers under judicial review the High Court is not
required to interfere with the same – Specific plea raised by the
appellant ought to have been considered by the High Court –
Decision of Division Bench and of Single Judge set aside – The
matter remitted to the Single Judge of the High Court to consider
the writ petition afresh on whether the Selection Committee was
justified in awarding the marks on experience ignoring the services
rendered by the appellant as daily wager and also whether the
respondent no.6 was fulfilling the requisite eligibility criteria as
per the advertisement – Appeal partly allowed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4144
of 2022.
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 596
596
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
597
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.06.2016 of the High Court
of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.A. No. 1593 of 2014.
Romy Chacko, Sudesh Kumar, Advs. for the Appellant.
Mathai M. Paikaday, Sr. Adv., Ms. Malini Poduval, Ms. Babita
Sant, Sanjay Jain, Shishir Pinaki, Amit Singh, Alexander M. Paikaday,
Advs. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order dated 30.06.2016 passed by the High Court of Kerala at
Ernakulam in Writ Appeal No.1593 of 2014 by which the Division Bench
of the High Court has dismissed the said appeal and has not interfered
with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing
the writ petition preferred by the appellant herein – original writ petitioner,
the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal.
2. That the appellant herein - original writ petitioner was serving
as Technical Assistant Grade-II on daily wages in the School of
Engineering under the Cochin University of Science and Technology.
That he was continued in service as daily wager by giving periodical
breaks. Thereafter he applied for the post of Technical Assistant Grade
– II in terms of Notification dated 24.07.2010 issued by the respondent
University. He was placed much below in the rank list as he was awarded
less marks on experience ignoring his earlier services rendered as daily
wagers. Therefore, he approached the High Court by way of Writ
Petition No.27538 of 2012.  All the other employees in the rank list were
also made party to the writ petition.
2.1 By a detailed judgment and order the learned Single Judge
specifically observed and held that the original respondent no.5 was given
the appointment, and was found at serial no.2 in the merit list, his
appointment was absolutely illegal as he was not having the requisite
qualification and he was not fulfilling the eligibility criteria.  So far as the
case of the writ petitioner is concerned, the learned Single Judge was of
the opinion that as the Selection Committee has followed certain criteria
and forwarded the same in respect of all the candidates awarding the
marks on experience, cannot be said to be arbitrary and it is not open for
the Court to exercise the power under judicial review and decide
BIJU K.K. v. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
598
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
otherwise. That it was submitted on behalf of the writ peti

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