The Court agreed that ranks were not the only marker for evaluating a student’s ability. However, it proceeded to find fault with the Chancellor for not having considered the rank-holding petitioners at all for nomination.
The Court observed that the Chancellor did not have the power to nominate students while disregarding the rank holders or students with credentials altogether.
“Rank holders are certainly persons who should be treated as students with outstanding academic ability … Their credentials do not look inferior to those of the students nominated … True, it is only a nomination and there is an element of discretion involved while making choices. Even for that, eligibility criteria fixed in the statute cannot be forgotten,” the Court said.
It added that any arbitrary use of discretionary powers would violate the rule of equality and non-discrimination under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
“An unguided, unfettered and unbridled power is foreign to the exercise of any power, constitutional or statutory. It is trite that even in the exercise of discretionary power, the requirements of reasonableness, rationality, impartiality, fairness and equity are inherent to such exercise and can never be according to any private opinion,” the Court further observed.
Source: Barandbench
