A. MERCY VASAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) On being appraised of the aforesaid facts, this Court had raised a preliminary query to Mr. Abhishek Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioners, with regard to its powers to overcome the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which had earlier ratified the Board's decision to cancel the same notification and had allowed the Board's appeal in this regard. In reply, Mr. Abhishek submitted that, when the Hon'ble Supreme Court had earlier seized of the matter and passed its final order, the investigation into the fraud was in progress and now that the investigation/enquiry had been completed and the 196 fraudsters have been permanently debarred by the Board, the withdrawal of the entire selection process is not warranted.

(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is not based on intelligible differentia. Effectively, the learned counsel seeks this Court to interpret the findings and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in a manner convenient to the petitioners and as opposed to the ratio behind the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order. The reasons for allowing the Appeals of the Board has been thus laid down by the Apex Court: