-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
The PIL, filed by Dr. Ajay Pal, questioned the qualifications and the legitimacy of the respondent’s long-standing directorship, alleging a lack of requisite qualifications and a fabricated employment record. However, the Court, led by the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula, found that the accusations were unsupported by evidence. The Court stated, “It has been demonstrated that Respondent No. 3 met the prescribed criteria at the relevant times, and there has been a substantial compliance with due process in his appointment.”
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Mobin Akhtar, argued that the respondent had secured his position through forged and fabricated academic credentials. In contrast, counsel for the respondents, including Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC, and Mr. R.M. Bagai, defended the legitimacy of the appointment process, affirming that the respondent had served with distinction and met all recruitment norms.
The Court meticulously reviewed the service records and educational qualifications of the respondent and concluded that the “presumption of regularity in public appointments” was not dislodged. This ruling comes after an in-depth examination of Respondent No. 3’s service records and a thorough evaluation of the policies surrounding the directorial tenure.
Furthermore, the High Court dismissed the petitioner’s claims about the respondent’s alleged inefficacy in his role as Director and noted that such assessments fall outside the Court’s purview under Article 226.
The dismissal of the petition reaffirms the integrity of the appointment procedures and the credentials of Dr. Basavaraddi, who retired on June 30, 2023. The decision has been welcomed by the Union Ministry of AYUSH and the MDNIY, emphasizing the Court’s commitment to uphold the lawful appointments to public offices.
Date of Decision: 07 November, 2023
AJAY PAL VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/07-Nov-2023-Dr.Ajaypal-Vs-UOI.pdf"]
