Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from an order of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court concerning recruitment to posts of lower and upper division clerks in Guruvayoor Devaswom. The High Court had earlier directed that the written test question papers be set and printed by the Administrator with utmost secrecy and distributed only at the examination centre. It also directed that interviews be conducted by a committee comprising the Chairman, the Administrator, and Mr. M. Gopalan, a member of the Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee and a practicing advocate, with the Director of Training, High Court, as an observer. By the impugned order dated 2.11.1995, the High Court replaced Gopalan with the Director as a member of the committee. The Managing Committee appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that judicial officers should not be part of the selection process. On 12.1.1996, during admission, a devotee sought to intervene and was directed to file an affidavit regarding any allegations against Gopalan. The intervenor's counsel later stated that the prepared affidavit was not reflective of correct facts and had contra oral instructions. The Supreme Court deprecated this tendency to file an affidavit inconsistent with oral instructions and proceeded on the footing that no allegations were made against Gopalan. The core legal issues were whether the High Court was justified in replacing a committee member with a judicial officer and whether courts should associate their judicial officers with administrative selections. Senior counsel for the appellant argued that it would be salutary to leave the selection to the selection committee without judicial involvement, as associating a judicial officer could expose the court to criticism if allegations arose against the selections. The court agreed, observing that it is not proper for the court to associate itself with the process of conducting examinations by nominating its judicial officer in the selection process. In the absence of any allegation against Gopalan and any indication to that effect in the High Court's order, the Supreme Court held that the High Court was not justified in removing him from the committee. The appeal was allowed, and the High Court's order replacing Gopalan was set aside, without costs.
Headnote
A) Judicial Review - Judicial Participation in Administrative Selection - Courts should not involve judicial officers in selection processes - No statutory provision cited - The High Court had directed that interviews be conducted by a committee including a judicial officer as member, replacing a non-judicial member. Held that associating a judicial officer with selection of candidates is improper and may invite criticism of the court; the judicial arm should not actively participate in administrative selections. (Paras Not mentioned) B) Administrative Law - Removal of Committee Member - Absence of allegations - No statutory provision cited - The High Court replaced Mr. M. Gopalan, a member of the Managing Committee and practicing advocate, with the Director of Training, High Court, without any allegation or indication against Gopalan. Held that absent any allegations, the High Court was not justified in removing him from the committee. (Paras Not mentioned) C) Practice and Procedure - Affidavit and Oral Instructions - Duty of parties to state true facts - No statutory provision cited - The intervenor devotee sought to file an affidavit but counsel indicated it was inconsistent with oral instructions. The Supreme Court deprecated the tendency to file an affidavit and give contra oral instructions; parties must state true and correct facts in affidavits and stand by them. Held that no allegations were made against Gopalan as the devotee failed to substantiate any. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in replacing a member of the selection committee with a judicial officer; whether a court should actively involve its judicial officers in the process of selection of candidates; whether removal of a committee member without any allegations is valid.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's order replacing Mr. M. Gopalan with the Director of Training as a member of the selection committee. The Court held that the High Court was not justified in removing Gopalan in the absence of any allegation against him and that courts should not associate judicial officers with the selection process. No costs were awarded.
Law Points
- Courts should not associate judicial officers in selection processes
- Removal of committee member requires allegations
- Affidavit must state true facts
- Court should avoid criticism in selection matters
