Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj Vs Union of India And Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court found that the rejection of a top-ranked candidate for appointment as Member (Accountant), ITAT was vitiated by a reasonable apprehension of bias. One member of the fourth Search-cum-Selection Committee had earlier faced contempt proceedings at the instance of the petitioner in the very dispute over his appointment. In these circumstances, the officer’s participation in evaluating the petitioner violated the rule against bias and the principles of natural justice, as justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. Even without proof of actual prejudice, a reasonable likelihood of bias was sufficient to nullify the decision.
Tracing a long history of departmental obstruction and vindictive action—earlier compulsory retirement of the petitioner having already been quashed by the Court—the Bench held that the inclusion of the said officer created a genuine and sustainable apprehension of partiality. The Court emphasised that where even one member of a collective decision-making body is disqualified for likelihood of bias, the entire decision stands vitiated because subtle influence in group deliberations cannot be ruled out. The respondents’ failure to file any counter-affidavit left the allegations of mala fides and vendetta uncontroverted.
