The Supreme Court in the case State of West Bengal v. Anindya Sundar Das observed and stated that a writ of quo warranto can be issued where an appointment has not been made in accordance with the law.
The bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and the Justice Hima Kohli observed and has stated while dismissing the appeals filed by the State of West Bengal and Sonali Chakravarti Banerjee wherein challenging the order of the Calcutta High Court which had set aside the decision taken by the State to re-appoint Banerjee as Vice-Chancellor (VC) of Calcutta University. It had been allowed by the High Court that the writ petition filed by Anindya Sundar Das, an alumnus of Calcutta University and a practicing advocate, wherein seeking a writ of quo warranto against the Vice-Chancellor of Calcutta University.
It was observed by the Apex Court bench that the State of West Bengal usurped the powers of the Chancellor (WB Governor) while re-appointing Banerjee as the Vice-Chancellor of the Calcutta University.
However, the bench noted that the High Court had observed that a writ of quo warranto can be issued when:
(i) A person holding public office lacks the eligibility criteria prescribed for such appointments.
(ii) The appointment being made contrary to the statutory provisions or rules.
Therefore, the court dealt with the procedural objection regarding the limits of the writ of quo warranto.
The court while referring to the various judgments including the case Bharati Reddy versus. The State of Karnataka (2018) 6 SCC 162,
The bench observed that though the court has settled the position that the writ of quo warranto can be issued where an appointment has not been made in accordance with the law.