2008 (3) TMI 667 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the selection process was not in accordance with the Rules? Whether the writ petitions were rightly dismissed by the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court? Whether the Government can by way of administrative instructions fill up the gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed if rules are silent on any particular point?

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against selection and appointments of Assistant Teachers (Physical Education) in Garhwal Mandal.
2. Examination of Rules regarding educational qualifications for selection.
3. Validity of selection process and participation of candidates.
4. Authority of the Government to supplement rules with administrative instructions.

Analysis:

1. The appeals were filed against the judgment setting aside the selection and appointments of Assistant Teachers (Physical Education) in Garhwal Mandal due to alleged violation of Rules. The candidates challenged the selection criteria, leading to a series of legal proceedings.

2. The Rules specified the educational qualifications required for the post, which were a Graduation degree in Physical Education or a Diploma in Physical Education. The Government clarified that B.P.E. degree holders should be treated on par with other degree holders with a diploma in physical education, eliminating the need for an additional degree.

3. The Court emphasized that candidates who participated in the selection process without objection cannot later challenge the process on the grounds of non-compliance with the Rules. Referring to previous judgments, it was established that candidates who willingly participate in the selection process are estopped from questioning its validity later.

4. The judgment delved into the authority of the Government to issue administrative instructions to supplement rules in cases where the rules are silent on specific points. While the Government cannot supersede statutory rules, it can fill gaps and issue instructions not inconsistent with existing rules to govern conditions of service.

5. Ultimately, the Court allowed the Civil Appeals filed by successful candidates, setting aside the High Court's judgment. The costs were not imposed. Additionally, a separate Civil Appeal filed by non-selected candidates was dismissed, concluding the legal proceedings on the matter.