Mohinder Sain Garg Etc. Etc vs State Of Punjab And Ors
- SCC(1991) 1 SCC 662
- Neutral1990 INSC 352
- SCR[1990] Supp (3) SCR 108
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
1. Where a selection process for direct recruitment to public employment provides for a composite selection method of written examination and interview, the percentage of marks allocated to the viva voce test should not exceed 15 per cent of the total marks, as a percentage of 25 per cent is arbitrary and excessive and violates Article 14 of the Constitution, notwithstanding that the selection body is a subordinate committee rather than a public service commission. 2. The calling of a significantly larger number of candidates for interview than the number of vacancies available (such as 1200 candidates for 54 posts) does not vitiate the selection process merely on that ground, provided the action is not tainted by mala fide or oblique motive and is done in accordance with rules that have been consistently followed. 3. Where candidates have already been selected and joined their posts, their selections will not be quashed even if the percentage of marks allocated to the viva voce test is found to have been excessively high. 4. Where a writ petitioner seeking quashing of a selection and a fresh viva voce test would, even under corrected criteria, have stood no realistic chance of selection, relief in the form of quashing the entire selection is not granted as it would be a futile exercise for that petitioner.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors., [1971] 2 SCR 430; Miss Nishi Maghu and Ors. v. State of J & K & Ors., [1980] 4 SCC 95; Ajay Hasia & Ors. v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and Ors., [1981] 1 SCC 722; Koshal Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. State of J & K and Ors., [1984] 3 SCR 407, relied on.
State of U.P. v. Rafiquddin and Ors., [1987] Supp. SCC 401; Mahmood Alam Tariq and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., [1988] 3 SCC 241; distinguished.
Liladhar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., [1981] 4 SCC 159, referred to.
2. Even if the entire selection is quashed and a direc- tion given to hold the viva voce test afresh by reducing the percentage of marks, it would be a futile exercise so far as the two Writ Petitioners are concerned, as they stood no chance of being selected even remotely. According to Ashok Kumar Yadav's case candidates should be called only three times the number of seats available for appointment. If that criteria was applied then the two Writ Petitioners had absolutely no chance of being called for interview for the one post of Taxation Inspector in the category of backward class. [135C-E].
Ashok Kumar Yadav and Ors. etc. etc. v. State of Haryana & Ors. etc. etc. [1985] Suppl. SCR 657, referred to. 3.1. In the general category 897 candidates had appeared in interview and so far as one of the four appellants, viz., Rajesh Kumar 111 Saili is concerned, he secured 26 marks in interview and his position was 668th. He stood no chance of being called for interview if candidates upto three times the number of the posts were called for interview. Even if the percentage of marks in viva voce was reduced from 25 per cent to 15 per cent he stood no chance of selection even remotely. [135G-H] 3.2. The respondents are directed to appoint the other three appellants belonging to general category on the posts of Taxation Inspector/Excise Inspector as the case may be, if they are otherwise found suitable for these posts. It is further made clear that in case anyone of these appellants has become over-aged during this period, this would not be considered as a disqualification for their appointment to the above post. [136G-H; 137-A]
&
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free