UNION OF INDIA versus ASHUTOSH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA AND ANR.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 488 · Decided: 03-10-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
UNION OF INDIA 
v. 
ASHUTOSH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA AND ANR. 
•I 
OCTOBER 3, 2001 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] 
Service Law : 
Interview-Non-selection-Allegation of ma/a.fide-Bias of Sele~tion 
Committ~e not proved-Tribunal sitting in Judgment overinterview and allotting 
marks-Correctness of-Held, not correct. 
Mala.fide-Allegation of-Burden to prove-Held, is on the person who 
alleges-There is always presumptio:i in/avoitr of administration that it exercises 
powers in good faith and for public benefit~Evidence Act-Presumption.' 
Respondent No.1 having failed in viva voce test conducted by Selection. 
Committee, was not selected for the post in question. He flied application 
before Central Administrative Tribu_nal alleging malafides against the 
Chairman of the Committee, stating that he was closely related to one 'S' 
who was placed under suspension pursuant to an inquiry which was 
conducted by Respondent No. 1 when he was in Vigilance Department. 
Tribunal on the basis of proximity of Secretary to the Chairman of the 
Committee concluded that it was highly probable that the Secretary could 
have influenced the Chairman of the Selection Committee again~t 
Respondent No. 1 and quashed the result of viva voce test in respect of 
Respondent No. 1. It further directed the appellants to subject Respondent 
No. 1 to a fresh viva voce test. H;ence this appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. The approach of the Tribunal in concluding that it was 
highly probable that the Secretary could have influenced the Chairman of 
the Selection Committee against Respondent No. 1 is fallacious. The Tribunal 
ought to have considered the matter in right perspective, and should not 
have sat in judgment over the interview and allotted marks on its own and 
issued directions in the manner it did. [492-H; 493-F] 
2. So long as bias of the Selection Committee could not be proved, 
488 
U.0.1. v. A.K. SRIVASTAVA [RAJENDRA BABU, J.] 
489 
the only aspect that the Tribunal ought to have considered was whether 
there was compliance with the relevant rules in the conduct of interview. It 
could not have considered the manner in which interview was concluded 
and whether the marks should have been allotted in a particular manner 
or otherwise and whether marks awarded was justified in the present case 
or not. [493-C; BJ 
3. There is always a presumption in favour of administration that it 
exercises powers in good faith and for public benefit. The burden is on the 
individual to produce sufficient material to suggest the malafides of the 
concerned authority and it is not easy to discharge the same. (492-D] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1567 of 1996. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.10.95 of the Central Administrative 
Tribunal, Allahabad in 0.A. No. 1057 of 1994. 
A 
B 
c 
M.N. Goswami, Niranjana Singh, Anil Katiyar, Arvind Kumar Sharma, 
D 
for the Appellants .. 
Waziri and Irshad Ahmad for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RAJENDRA BABU, J. Respondent No: 1 herein was working as Chief 
Vigilance Inspector at North Eastern Railway. He appeared for written 
examination held on 12.3.1994 for selection to the post of Assistant Engineer, 
Grade 'B' for filling up 70% of the vacancies reserved for promotees. The 
result of the written test was published on 2.5.1994 and he was declared 
qualified i.n the written examination. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 appeared for 
interview before a Selection Committee consisting of Shri M.M. Goyal, Chief 
Engineer as Chairman, respondent No. 2 herein, Shri Ram Deo, Chief Personnel 
Officer (Admn.) and Shri Binod Prasad, Chief Electrical Engineer. His interview 
took place on May 20 and 21, 1994. The selection proceedings were finalised 
by the Selection Committee on May 25, 1994. On May 27, 1994 a cassette 
was delivered anonymously to the Chief Personnel Officer who in turn passed 
it on to the members of the Selection Committee. Thereafter, the Selection 
Committee met again on May 30, 1994 and took vn record the transcript of the 
cassette anonymously delivered. After recording certain proceedings, the . 
Selection Committee put the entire matter to the General Manager, North 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
C· 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
490 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur, for approval.· Thereafter, on June 3, ·1994 
respondent No. 1 alleged malafides on the part of the Selection Committee an

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