NILANGSHU BHUSHAN BASU ETC. versus DEB K. SINHA AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 493 · Decided: 31-08-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

NILANGSHU BHUSHAN BASU ETC. 
v. 
DEB K. SINHA AND ORS. ETC. 
AUGUST 31, 200 I 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND BRIJESH KUMAR, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980: Section 14. 
Calcutta Municipal Corporation (Recruitment of Officers appointed by 
Mayor-in-Council) Rules, I 985, Appendix VII. 
A 
B 
c 
Selection by direct recruitment-Appointment of Chief Municipal 
Engineer in consulation with Public Service Commission-High Court set 
aside the selection on the ground that the guidelines followed in the selection D 
arbitrmy-lt also held priority to be given to departmental candidates to 
promote them subject to merit and suitability and if not feasible to go for 
direct recruitment-On appeal, held, if rules permit, appointment by direct 
recruitment or by promotion imposing any condition would amount to 
legislating a provision in the Statute and would amount to interference in 
administrative function of appointing authority-Judicial bodies not to sit in E 
judgment over the wisdom of executives in choosing mode of recruitment. 
Experience in responsible post not not mean experience in just below 
post-Selection cannot be thrown out .on the ground that there was no break 
up of marks-Assessment of merit on the basis of work experience and personal p 
interview by expert body cannot be discarded 
The recruitment to the post of Chief Municipal Engineer (Civil) was 
made in accordance with the provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation 
Act, 1980 and Calcutta Municipal Corporation (Recruitment of Officers 
appointed by Mayor-in-Council) Rules 1985. As per appendix VII to the rules G 
at S.No.8, qualification was prescribed for selection and appointment of Chief 
Engineer (Civil) by direct recruitment as well as by promotion. As per section 
14(3)(a) of the Act, the Corporation in consulation with the Public Service 
Commission selected candidate for the said post by direct recruitment. High 
Court set aside the selection holding that there was no guideline followed for 
493 
H 
494 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A selecting the mode of recruitment viz. direct selection or by promotion and 
viewed that when both modes are available, first to choose the process for 
recruitment by promotion; that if no suitable candidate was available then 
direct recruitment could be resorted to; that otherwise it amounts to arbitrary 
and discriminatory exercise of powers by the appointing authority; and that 
the Public Commission should have been consulted by the Corporation as to 
B the mode of recruitment. Hence this appeal. The connected SLP relates to 
the same appointment. 
Allowing the appeal and dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Court 
C 
HELD: I.I. The provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 
1980 or the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (Recruitment of Officer 
appointed by Mayor-in-Council) Rules, 1985 do not substantiate the 
propositions as laid down by the High Court. When the rules permit 
recruitment to a post either by direct recruitment or by promotion leaving 
the decision to the appropriate authority, it would be difficult to lay down 
D that process of recruitment by promotion must necessarily be adopted first. 
E 
F 
G 
As a matter of fact it would amount to legislating a provision in the statute. 
(498-E-FJ 
State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. v. Sadanandan and Ors., AIR (1989) 
SC 2060, relied on. 
1.2. Modes of recruitment and category from which the recruitment 
should be made are all matters which lies in the exclusive domain of the 
executive. It is not for the Ji.:licial bodies to sit in judgment over the wisdom 
of the executive in choosing the mode of recruitment or the categories from 
which the recruitment should be made as these are policy decisions to be taken 
by the executive. Such decisions are purely administrative in nature. A perusal 
of the record indicates that the question of mode of recruitment was discussed 
by Mayor-in-Council. Therefore, contents of the note should not be doubted 
for the sufficiency of discussion or correctness of decision taken. 
(499-B-C; E( 
1.3. As per clauses (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 14, appointment to 
the given post shall be made by Mayor-in-Council in consultation with State 
Public Service Commission. The word 'recruitment' includes any method viz. 
appointment, selection, promotion or deputation provided for inducting a 
person into public service. However, in Section 14(3) the word 'recruitment' 
H 

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