In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has reaffirmed the appointment of senior IAS officer Nidhi Chhibber as the chairman of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). This decision came in response to a petition filed by the Independent School Federation of India, which had raised concerns over Chhibber’s qualifications for the esteemed position.
Also read- Delhi High Court Orders Police Officers To Pay ₹50,000 For Illegally Detaining A Man (lawchakra.in)
The Federation’s contention revolved around the belief that Chhibber did not meet the stipulated terms and conditions required for the CBSE Chairman role. They argued that her appointment was not in line with the standards set by the board and demanded a thorough review of her credentials.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who presided over the case, offered a detailed rebuttal to the petitioner’s claims. He firmly stated that the petitioner had failed to present a “prima facie case” against Chhibber’s appointment. Delving deeper into the matter, Justice Singh highlighted the importance of due process and emphasized that the petition seemed to be a
“gross misuse of the process of law.”
One of the pivotal points of the case was the court’s stance on the issuance of a writ of quo warranto. Justice Singh clarified that the court did not see the need to issue such a writ in this particular case. This is because, after a comprehensive review, it was evident that Chhibber fulfilled the qualifications necessary for the position of the Chairperson of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).
The Federation’s plea was multifaceted. Apart from challenging Chhibber’s appointment, they also sought her removal from the post and demanded transparency in the form of records that showcased her eligibility and experience for the role. Responding to these demands, Chhibber submitted an affidavit. In this document, she underscored her extensive experience, noting her 48-month tenure in the Education department, where she served in the esteemed cadre of Director and above.
Chhibber’s legal team was proactive in countering the allegations. They pointed out that she not only met but exceeded the qualifications and experience criteria as outlined in the 2015 vacancy circular for the CBSE Chairman position.
After meticulous scrutiny of Chhibber’s affidavit, coupled with the executive record sheet, the court was convinced of her suitability for the role. Justice Singh took the opportunity to elucidate the conditions under which a writ of quo warranto is issued. Such a writ is typically reserved for situations where an individual holding a public office is found to be lacking in the necessary qualifications. In the case of Chhibber, she was deemed more than qualified.
In his concluding remarks, Justice Singh expressed his concerns over the misuse of the legal process for such petitions. He decisively dismissed the petition and any related applications, sending a clear message about the sanctity of the appointment process.
This ruling by the Delhi High Court not only underscores the importance of meritocracy in public office appointments but also serves as a reminder of the rigorous processes and checks in place to ensure the credibility and integrity of such appointments.
