A K DOSHI Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule D.B.

(2.) Dr. A.K.Doshi felt aggrieved by the impugned order dated 3rd February, 1999 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short CAT) whereby his appointment as Member, Company Law Board has been quashed. His challenge is primarily based on the following grounds,nanely (i) CAT had no jurisdiction to entertain any petition against him after his selection as Member of the Company Law board (in short the CLB). Being Member of the CLB he no longer held a civil post, therefore, was outside the purview and jurisdiction of the CAT. (ii) The recommendation of the Selection Committee qua respondent No.3 Mr.S.B.Mathur was rejected by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet i.e. the ACC on 4th December,1997. Respondent No.3 having not challenged his rejection for the appointment as member of the CLB, had no locus standi to challenge the appointment of the petitioner to the said post of Member of CLB. Finally the Selection Committee prepared a select panel. The name of respondent No.3 was at serial No.1 and that of the petitioner at Serial No.2. According to petitioner after the ACC rejected the name of respondent No.3, natural corollary to follow was to offer the appointment to the petitioner who was at serial No.2 in the select list. Having done so the Government followed correct procedure. The CAT, therefore, could not have, by the impugned order quashed the appointment of the petition.

(3.) In order to appreciate the challenge raised by the petitioner, it would be expedient to know in brief the facts of this case. The Government of India framed Company Law Board (Qualifications, Experience and Other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules,1993 (hereinafter called the Rules.). These rules were notified no 28th April,1993. The Company Law Board was constituted under sub-Section (1) of Section 10(E) of the Companies Act,1956. The recruitment of Members of CLB is governed by Rules 4(1). Rule 4 prescribes the method of recruitment of the Members. Sub-Rule(1) of Rule 4 prescribes that the selection of Member shall be made by the Government of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India or his nominee. Chief Justice of India nominated Justice S.C.Aggarwal as his nominee. Justice S.C.Aggarwal became the Chairperson of the Selection Committee. The Selection committee recommended a select list in which the name of respondent No.3 appeared at serial No.1 to be appointed for the post of Member (Technical) CLB. The select list also consisted two other names i.e. of petitioner at serial No.2 and that of Shri R.Vasudevan at serial No.3 in order of priority. The name of the select person at serial No.1 i.e. of respondent No.3 herein was sent for appointment to the ACC. The ACC in turn on the basis of information furnished by the Department declined to approve the name of the respondent No.3 as Member (Technical) CLB. The ACC vide order dated 4th December,1997 while rejecting the name of the respondent No.3 directed the Ministry to submit a fresh proposal for the appointment of Member (Technical) CLB.