S.K. SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS per Annexure 1 advertisement, applications were invited for the posts of (1) Chairman and Managing Director/Managing Director, (2) Director Finance -Distribution/Trading, (3) Director Distribution/Operation, (4) Managing Director -Transmission and (5) Executive Director (Transmission) -Transmission Company, in the Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd. The Petitioner Sri S.K. Sharma applied for the post of Director, Distribution/Operation. He was called for interview and he participated in the interview. However, he was not selected or appointed. On the other hand, the fourth Respondent Sri B.M. Verma who had not applied for the post of Director, Distribution/Operation was appointed as Joint Managing Director against the post of Director, Distribution/Operation. Aggrieved by the denial of appointment to the Petitioner, he has filed this writ petition praying for the following reliefs :

(2.) SEPARATE counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of Respondents Nos. 1 and 4, disputing the claim of the Petitioner and objecting to the prayers in the writ petition. The Petitioner has filed separate rejoinder affidavits in reply to the said counter affidavits.

(3.) THE Respondents have admitted that the Petitioner had applied for the post of Director, Distribution/Operation and that he was called for interview. But it is categorically stated that, though four candidates including the Petitioner were considered by the Interview Board, none of them was found suitable for selection and therefore, the Interview Board did not recommend any of them for appointment to the post of Director, Distribution/Operation. The Petitioner has not made any allegation of bias or malafides or incompetence against the members of the Interview Board. In the absence of any such allegation of bias or malafides or incompetence against the members of the Interview Board, the decision taken by the Interview Board with regard to the suitability of the candidates cannot be subjected to judicial review. Hence, the decision of the Interview Board that all the four candidates including the Petitioner were not suitable for appointment to the post of Director, Distribution/Operation, is not liable to be interfered with by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the prayer of the Petitioner for a direction to the Respondents to appoint him as Director, Distribution/Operation in Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd. is liable to be rejected.