New Delhi, Sep 1 (IANS) The state government's power to make appointments to higher posts cannot be questioned through a public interest litigation (PIL), the Supreme Court has held.

Giving this ruling on Aug 28 a bench of judges A.R. Lakshmanan and Tarun Chatterjee said the high courts should not entertain quo warranto writ petitions challenging the appointments from those who had no locus standi to file such petitions.

The bench said that the government had to make the best possible choice keeping in view the larger interests of the administration. The court could not sit in judgement over the wisdom of the government in the choice of the person to be appointed so long as the person chosen possessed the prescribed qualification and was otherwise eligible for appointment.

Writing the judgement for the bench Justice Lakshmanan said: "So long as the appointment is made on account of the exigencies of administration, it would be valid and not open to attack under Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution (equality before law and equality of opportunity in matters of public appointment)."

The bench made it clear that evaluation of the comparative merits of the candidates could not be gone into in a PIL and a third party would have no locus standi to canvass the legality or the correctness of the action.

The court was hearing appeals by the Karnataka government and B. Srinivasa Reddy against a Karnataka High court judgement.

The high court, acting on a PIL from the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board Employees' Association, had quashed Reddy's appointment as the board's managing director.

Allowing the appeals, the bench pulled up the workers' union for suppressing the fact that it was not a registered union as its registration had been cancelled. The bench said: "Courts cannot grant any relief to a person who comes to a court with unclean hands and malafide intention/motive."