K.L. NANDAKUMARAN NAIR versus K.I. PHILIP AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 14 · Decided: 10-09-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
K.L. NANDAKUMARAN NAIR 
v. 
K.I. PHILIP AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] 
Service matter: 
Selection of electricians (HS) after conducting trade test-Appellant 
secures qual{fying minimum marks-Promoted to electrician ( HS)-0.A. filed 
challenging the selection-Rejected-Respondents not preferred appeal or review 
petition against the order but preferred another 0.A. challenging the selection-
Division Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal directed the Chief 
Engineer to dispose of the representations by the responff,ents-Against the 
order of Chief Engineer rejecting the representation another 0.A. filed-Held, 
Tabulation sheet:,/mark sheets destroyed and not made available to the Tribunal-
Directed fresh selection-Review rejected-On appeal held, Tribunal erred by 
ignoring the affidavit by Selection Committee that note sheet destroyed only 
after entries in tabulation sheet-Also ignored pleading-Available records 
sufficient to conclude the matter-Ought to have exercised great care. 
Respondents challenged the selection of appellant as Electrician (HS) 
before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Tribunal dismissed the 
O.A. on the ground that they had not obtahted qualifying minimum marks. 
The respondents did not prefer appeal or review petition against the 
order but filed another O.A. which was disposed of with the direction to 
the Chief Engineer to dispose of the representation of the respondents. The 
representation was rejected by the Chief Engineer upon which another 
O.A. was filed in which the issue was that trade test had not been conducted 
for the respondentS. The Tribunal gave directions for fresh selection since 
the tabulation sheets/mark sheets had been destroyed and were not made 
available to the Tribunal. However, no reference was made to its earlier 
order. The Review Petition filed against the said order was dismissed. 
Hence these appeals. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD : The Tribunal ought to have considered the facts recorded in 
the course of judgment by another Bench of the Tribunal in which the 
H 
records of selection and the mark sheets had been examined by the Tribunal. 
14 
K.L. NANDAKUMARAN NAIR v. K.l. PHILIP [RAJENDRA BABU, J.J 
15 
Further, the affidavit of Selection Committee was also available on record 
declaring that note sheets were destroyed soon after entries was made in 
the minutes and tabulation sheets, but the document does not reveal that 
the tabulation sheets or the mark sheets were destroyed and the available 
records were sufficient to conclude the matter. The Tribunal ought to have 
exercised great care in these matters where interests of several employees 
were involved and should have allowed the review when it was pointed out 
in the counter affidavit that mark sheets and tabulation sheets were 
available. However, the Tribunal totally ignored the pleadings and the 
material available. [16·G·H; 17-A-D] 
A 
B 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5340 of 1997. 
C 
From the Judgment and Order dated 8.8.96 of the Central Administration 
Tribunal, Emakulam at Kerala in R.A. No. 17/95 in O.A. No. 418 of 1994. 
WITH 
C.A. No. 5341/1997. 
K.Sukumaran, Ms. Baby Krishnan, Ms. Karthika S. and N.R. Shonker 
for the Appellant. 
M.N. Krishnamani, Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, K. Misra, M.T. George and 
D 
T.G. Narayanan Nair for the Respondents. 
E 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RAJENDRA BABU, J. These appeals arise out of certain proceedings 
in 0.A. No. 418/94 filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam 
Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). Respondent Nos. 1 to 4, who 
were working as Electricians (HS), Grade II, by O.A. No. 771/93 challenged 
the selection of the appellants as Electricians (HS). A Division Bench of the 
Tribunal after going through the record of the selection and the mark sheets 
found that out of the total marks of 100, 35 marks have been allotted to written 
test, 40 marks for practical test and 25 marks for viva voce. All the applicants 
had not obtained the qualifying minimum marks of 50 per cent prescribed for 
general candidates and 40 per cent marks for SC/ST candidates. On the basis 
of the marks obtained by them, the appellants have been promoted to the 
higher grade, which is a selection grade, and dismissed the application of 
respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Subsequently another application in 0.A. No. 
1308/93 was filed by 

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