CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has upheld the decision of the Centre’s reconstituted search-cum-selection committee to conduct a fresh selection process for judicial member post in the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) in the state, dismissing a petition filed by advocate Pranaya Kishore Harichandan.
Harichandan (62), who had applied for the position in February 2024 following a call for applications by the department of Revenue under the Union Ministry of Finance, was among the candidates initially shortlisted for personal interaction held in Kolkata on August 3, 2024. However, he moved the high court after learning that the committee had subsequently re-invited certain candidates, excluding him, for another round of interaction on May 31, 2025.
Represented by senior advocate Susanta Kumar Dash, Harichandan challenged the procedure adopted by the reconstituted committee. He argued that the process should have continued from the stage reached by the original committee, which had already conducted a round of personal interactions, rather than restarting the evaluation.
The Centre, represented by additional solicitor general of India N Venkatraman and deputy solicitor general Prasanna Kumar Parhi, countered the argument, asserting that the reconstituted committee was within its rights to begin afresh, especially after obtaining Intelligence Bureau (IB) inputs during the renewed scrutiny.
Delivering the judgement, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice MS Raman dismissed the writ petition, holding that no statutory provision barred the reconstituted committee from conducting a de novo (fresh) selection process. “The Authority has to act within the precincts of the law, and if no express fetter is placed on its functioning, a fresh evaluation cannot be considered illegal,” the bench ruled.
The court also noted that confidential IB feedback had been taken into account during the revised assessment, and such reports could not be dismissed as mere formalities. “If the committee decided to undertake an exercise based on inputs received from the IB, we do not find any illegality,” the judges observed.