'Individual Member Of Minorities Commission Has No Authority To Issue Orders On Behalf Of Commission': Patna High Court

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma held that the order issued by Md. Shamshad Alam, a member of the Bihar State Minorities Commission, in his individual capacity and without the consent of the Commission's Chairman was contrary to the Bihar State Minorities Commission Act, 1991.

The case arose from Advertisement No. 26 of 1999, issued by BPSC for recruitment to five posts of Assistant Professor (Physics) in engineering colleges in Bihar. Respondent No. 3 had applied for the post, cleared the screening examination held in February 2002 and appeared for an interview in September 2002. However, his name was not recommended for appointment because of his position in the merit list. According to BPSC, the candidate had secured 96.04 marks, whereas another candidate had secured 99.86 marks.

Subsequently, an appointment made against a reserved-category vacancy was cancelled in May 2006 after the selected candidate failed to join. Respondent No. 3 sought consideration for appointment against the resultant vacancy. He thereafter approached the High Court in CWJC No. 8411 of 2007. On March 13, 2012, the Court disposed of his petition with a direction to submit a representation before the concerned government authority. His representation was subsequently rejected. The candidate also challenged the rejection before the High Court and, in May 2013, approached the Bihar State Minorities Commission seeking directions concerning the vacant Assistant Professor post.

The Minorities Commission initially issued a notice and raised concerns regarding alleged discrimination against a minority candidate in the selection process. Thereafter, on December 30, 2013, Commission member Md. Shamshad Alam issued a direction requiring BPSC to take a decision and make a recommendation to the Science and Technology Department for the candidate's appointment.

Aggrieved, BPSC approached the High Court, contending that it was an autonomous constitutional body under Article 315 of the Constitution and that the Minorities Commission had no jurisdiction to interfere with public appointments by issuing such directions. BPSC further argued that the Minorities Commission was a recommendatory body and could not function as a superior adjudicatory authority in recruitment matters.

Significantly, the Bihar State Minorities Commission itself opposed the impugned order. In its counter-affidavit, the Commission stated that the direction had been issued by Md. Shamshad Alam in his individual capacity, on his own letterhead, without obtaining the consent of either the Commission or its Chairman. Examining the matter, the High Court found that the member had independently opened the proceedings and issued the impugned direction without the requisite authority. The Court observed:

“Having heard learned counsel for the parties and the stand taken by the Bihar State Minorities Commission in the counter affidavit, it transpire that the letter issued by the Minorities Commission by Md. Shamshad Alam (Advocate) in his individual capacity and without the consent of the Chairman of the Minorities Commission and the file in question opened by the learned Member in his individual capacity which is against the settled law of Minorities Commission Act, 1991. Apart from aforesaid, Section 8 of the Act, 1991 clarifies that the Minorities Commission shall not investigate into any such matter which is pending before any Court or Tribunal or Quasi-Judicial Body. In other words, the order impugned has been issued in an individual capacity by the learned Member, Bihar State Minorities Commission, Mohammad Shamshad Alam (Advocate). The learned Member, Bihar State Minorities Commission, Mohammad Shamshad Alam (Advocate) has not been vested with any power or authority to issue such order or direction on his behalf being member of the Commission or on behalf of the Commission, and as such the Minorities Commission is not supporting the order impugned which was issued by the respondent No. 3, learned Member, Bihar State Minorities Commission, Mohammad Shamshad Alam, Advocate.”

The Bench also referred to Section 8 of the Bihar State Minorities Commission Act, 1991, which prohibits the Commission from investigating matters pending before a court, tribunal or quasi-judicial body.

The Court concluded that the member had no authority to independently issue the impugned directions, either in his own capacity or on behalf of the Commission.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed BPSC's writ petition and set aside the order dated December 30, 2013.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner: Mr. K.K. Jha, Senior Advocate; Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondents: Mr. Md. Nadim Seraj, Advocate