CHAIRMAN Vs. H OMKARAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question that arises for decision in this Writ Appeal is whether the selection and appointment of Sri L. Nagaraj, the second respondent herein to the Post of Chief Manager is vitiated on account of factual malafide and breach of recruitment rules.

(2.) LEARNED Single Judge has opined that the allegation of malafide is unfounded. As regards allegation of infraction of recruitment rules, learned Single Judge has opined that since the selection committee did not evolve any method or norm for assessing relative merits of the candidates for appointment to the post of Chief Manager, the procedure adopted by the Committee could not be regarded as the one which was in conformity with Rule 5 (a) of Karnataka Small Industries Development Corporation (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 1978 as amended by the Board at their 164th meeting held on 27. 07. 1983. Although learned Single Judge has so opined, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, he has not quashed or set aside the selection and appointment of the second respondent on the basis of a representation made by learned counsel for the writ petitioner. But, while disposing of the writ petition, learned Judge directed the appellant Corporation to appoint the writ petitioner also as Chief Manager if there is any vacancy in the said post and if there is no such vacancy, then to create an additional post of Chief Manager in order to accommodate the petitioner.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the order of learned Single Judge. Learned counsel reiterated the same contentions urged before the learned Single Judge before us also.