MARKANDEY KATJU Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been filed against the impugned order of the learned single Judge dated 8. 4. 2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 11850 of 2005.

(2.) IT appears that the petitioner/appellant appeared for interview for selection to the post of Sub Inspector, but was not found fit. This Court cannot sit in appeal over the decision of a Selection Committee vide I. Saraswathi vs. The State of Tamil Nadu (2005 Writ L. R. 267) (paragraph 19 ).

(3.) IT is well settled by a series of decisions that in the matter of judicial review of administrative decisions this Court is not sitting in appeal. The Supreme Court in K. Vinod Kumar vs. S. Palanisamy ( (2003) 10 SCC 681: AIR 2003 SC 3171) has held that in proceedings and decisions taken in administrative matters, the scope of judicial review is confined to the decision-making process and does not extend to the merits of the decision taken. Further, we have in Rama. Muthuramalingam vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police reported in 2004 (5) CTC 554 = 2004-4-L. W. 737 = 2004 Writ L. R. 865, held that the Court must exercise self-restraint in matters relating to the administration in which the authorities are specialists and the Court which has no expertise in those matters should leave the same to the discretion of the authorities concerned.