2011 (5) Supreme 353
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma and Anil R. Dave, JJ.
Bhanu Pratap — Appellant
versus
State of Haryana & Ors. — Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 6205 of 2011
[Arising out of SLP(C) No. 9147 of 2008]
Decided on : 2-8-2011
Facts of the Case :
Advertisement was issued by respondents herein in the instant case in 2003 for filling up 73 posts of Subordinate Judges under Haryana Civil Services [Judicial Branch] Examination. The appellant appeared in the written tests and was declared successful and thereafter he was called for interview. Since appellant failed to qualify in terms of Rule 8 of Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules he was not appointed to said post.Writ petition was filed by appellant contending that since he received total aggregate marks of 508 out of 1020 total marks, i.e., 49.8% and since the marks obtained by him was short of 50% by just two marks same should be rounded off to qualifying marks of 50% in aggregate in terms of Rule 8 of Rules.Said Writ Petition was Dismissed by High Court.A Letters Patent Appeal filed thereagainst was also Dismissed.
2. Present appeal has been filed against impugned order of High Court.
Findings of the Court :
The Court held that when emphasis was given in the Rules itself to the minimum marks to be obtained making it clear that at least said minimum marks have to be obtained by concerned candidate there cannot be a question of relaxation or rounding off as sought by appellant.There is no power provided in the statute nor any such stipulation was made in the advertisement and also in the statutory Rules permitting any such rounding off or giving grace marks so as to bring up a candidate to the minimum requirement.No such rounding off or relaxation was permissible. The Rules are statutory in nature and no dilution or amendment to such Rules is permissible or possible by adding some words to the said statutory rules for providing or giving benefit of rounding off or relaxation.Appeal having no merit was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. —
1. Leave granted.
2. In this appeal we are called upon to decide an issue pertaining to an appointment to the Post of Subordinate Judge under the Haryana Civil Services [Judicial Branch] Examination which was advertised in 2003 and for which the selection process was completed in 2004. Thereafter two candidates who alone were selected have been appointed and joined their services on 18.03.2005 and 07.07.2005, respectively.
3. Even subsequent thereto advertisements have been issued for filling up similar vacancies in 2008 and 2010 which process was also long completed and persons selected have also been appointed pursuant to the said selection process. We are also informed that in 2011, further 111 posts have been advertised for which selection process has been initiated.
4. The appellant herein submitted his application as against the aforesaid advertisement issued by the respondents in 2003 for filling up 73 posts of Subordinate Judges under Haryana Civil Services [Judicial Branch] Examination. The appellant appeared in the written tests and was declared successful and thereafter he was called for interview. Incidentally out of 3,471 candidates who appeared for the written examination, only 3 persons obtained more than 50% marks in the written examination and were eligible under the extant Rules for being called for interview/viva- voce. All the 3 candidates called for interview duly appeared before the interview board constituted by the Haryana Public Service Commission [for short “the Commission”] in which one of the then Judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court was called as an Expert Advisor who was present during the process of the interview.
5. It transpires from the records that in the interview conducted by the Commission total marks allocated for the interview/viva-voce test were 120 and one Shri Vivek Nasir obtained 72 marks out of 120, whereas, Shri Anubhav Sharma was awarded 60 marks out of 120. However, the present appellant could get only 20 marks out of the total marks of 120 for the interview. Since he failed to qualify in terms of Rule 8 of the Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules [for short “the Rules”] he was not appointed to the said post.
6. Feeling aggrieved the appellant filed a Writ Petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh which was registered as CWP No. 12205 of 2005 in which he sought for a writ of mandamus directing his appointment to the post of Judicial Officer. In the Writ Petition his contention was that since he received total aggregate marks of 508 out of 1020 total marks, i.e., 49.8% and since the marks obtained by him was short of 50% by just two marks the same should be rounded off to the qualifying marks of 50% in aggregate in terms of Rule 8 of the Rules. It was contended that shortage of the percentage of half or less was to be rounded off and when the petitioner had obtained 49.8% in the whole aggregate after viva voce test, he should have been treated to have obtained 50% and should have been deemed to have qualified.
7. The aforesaid contention of the appellant, however, was rejected by the Single Judge of the High Court and the Writ Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed, which order was further upheld by the Division Bench on appeal. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of his Writ Petition and Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant filed the present appeal in this Court, on which we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties who had also taken us through the entire records.
8. Appointment to the post of Subordinate Judge (HCS Judicial Branch) is guided by Haryana Civil Services [Judicial Branch] Rules, which are statutory in nature. Rule 7(1), 7 (2) and 8(1) specifically deal with the minimum marks that a candidate has to obtain to qualify in the written test and also for selection. The said provisions are extracted hereinbelow for ready reference: -
“7(1) No candidate shall be credited with any m
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.