In Brief
The Supreme Court set aside High Court judgments that interfered with an administrative selection process for a retail outlet dealership. The High Court had overturned the appointment of the appellant (ranked first with 90.73 marks) and awarded it to the respondent (ranked second with 89.93 marks), finding his land was within the required Giriyama location. The Supreme Court held that the High Court improperly adjudicated disputed factual questions (land location) contrary to official reports from Revenue Authorities stating the respondent's land was in Falka block, outside Giriyama. The Court emphasized that writ jurisdiction does not permit substituting the court's factual findings for those of competent administrative authorities, nor undertaking comparative assessments of candidates' suitability for appointment. The appropriate remedy would have been remitting the matter for reconsideration, not reappraising marks and awarding the dealership."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.