B. S. MINHAS versus INDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE & ORS.
The Indian Statistical Institute, being an instrumentality of the Central Government and deeply controlled and financed, is an authority under Article 12 and thus subject to writ jurisdiction under Article 32. Non-compliance with bye-law 2, which requires suitable publicity for the Director's vacancy, invalidates the appointment due to lack of fair opportunity and arbitrariness, regardless of the bye-law's statutory status, as the Institute must follow its self-adopted procedural standards to avoid arbitrariness.
- Parties
- Petitioner: B. S. Minhas; Respondent No. 1: Indian Statistical Institute; Respondent No. 2: The Council of Indian Statistical Institute; Chairman of the Council: Respondent No. 3; Respondent No. 4: B.P. Adhikari; Respondent No. 5: Union of India
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 19 October 1983
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Petition allowed; appointment quashed.
- Legal Topics
- Definition of 'authority' Under Article 12, Maintainability of Writ Under Article 32, Compliance With Bye Laws, Obligation to Publicise Vacancy, Fair Procedure in Selection, Statutory Vs Non Statutory Bye Laws
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
B. S. Minhas
Petitioner
Indian Statistical Institute
Respondent No. 1
The Council of Indian Statistical Institute
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Chairman of the Council
B.P. Adhikari
Respondent No. 4
Union of India
Respondent No. 5
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Indian Statistical Institute is 'other authority' under Article 12 of the Constitution
- 2 Whether writ petition under Article 32 is maintainable against the Institute
- 3 Whether appointment of Director must comply with publicity requirement in bye-law 2
Ratio Decidendi
The Indian Statistical Institute, being an instrumentality of the Central Government and deeply controlled and financed, is an authority under Article 12 and thus subject to writ jurisdiction under Article 32. Non-compliance with bye-law 2, which requires suitable publicity for the Director's vacancy, invalidates the appointment due to lack of fair opportunity and arbitrariness, regardless of the bye-law's statutory status, as the Institute must follow its self-adopted procedural standards to avoid arbitrariness.
Court Disposition
Petition allowed; appointment quashed.
Orders
- Order of appointment dated August 3, 1979 of respondent no. 4 as Director is quashed and set aside.
- Prior actions of respondent no. 4 as Director remain valid; no refund of remuneration required.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment