Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AJAY RASTOGI, C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
Harkirat Singh Ghuman – Appellant
Versus
Punjab and Haryana High Court and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5874 of 2022, Special Leave Petition (C) No. 5079 of 2020
Decided On : 29-08-2022
Service Law – Selection – Punjab Superior Judicial Service/Haryana Superior Judicial Service – [Rule 7(3)(b) of Punjab Superior Judicial Services Rules, 2007] – So far as Paper VI (General Knowledge) is concerned, it is a multiple-choice question paper having 100 questions and all instructions were made available to candidates specifically indicated on overleaf of question paper and all candidates have attempted paper including present appellant – All candidates who had appeared in Paper VI (General Knowledge) had a common level playing field – To keep transparency in process of holding examination, particularly in such cases where there is a multiple-choice question paper, it is always advisable that for such question papers, there shall always be an OMR sheet which may be provided to candidates – As long as process is not complete, marks of written examination are not to be uploaded or made available to candidates and if it is being permitted, that will not be in interest of applicants – Disclosure of marks in main examination before it is finalised and viva-voce conducted, would be against principles of transparency, rather it will invite criticism of bias or favouritism – However, interview board which conducted viva-voce of candidates who qualified in written examination was different, there are hardly candidates who had qualified against number of vacancies and it would be advisable that there should be one common board to evaluate performance of all candidates who may now qualify in revised declaration of result of written examination and that would do justice to candidates – Impugned Judgment of High Court set aside and a fresh result of written examination be declared of candidates in reference to Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Service Examination, 2019 and those who qualify and fall in zone of three times number of vacancies may be called for viva-voce and result of selection process, thereafter be finally declared in accordance with scheme of Rules, 2007. (Paras 25, 26, 28, 33 and 35)
Facts of the case:
Appellant is one of the applicants who had participated in selection process initiated by respondents holding selections for direct recruitment to Punjab Superior Judicial Service/Haryana Superior Judicial Service. Appellant, being disappointed of not being qualified in written examination declared on 18th December 2019, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Objections raised by the appellant were repelled by the High Court at the motion stage, without calling for written response from the respondents under the judgment and order impugned dated 23rd January, 2020, which is subject matter of challenge in instant appeal.
Findings of Court:
So far as the intervenor is concerned, he appeared in the written examination against 10% quota reserved for in-service officers and he had participated in the selection process initiated under Punjab Superior Judicial Services in terms of Rule 7(3)(b) of the Punjab Superior Judicial Services Rules, 2007 and who has no lis with present process, at least the final fate of participation of the officer be declared by the respondents and may be processed further in accordance with the Rules.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
AJAY RASTOGI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 23rd January, 2020, dismissing the writ petition at the motion stage.
3. The appellant is one of the applicants who had participated in the selection process initiated by the respondents holding selections for direct recruitment to Punjab Superior Judicial Service/Haryana Superior Judicial Service.
4. That two separate advertisements came to be published for holding competitive examination for direct recruitment for 8 vacancies in the Punjab Superior Judicial Service and 11 vacancies in the Haryana Superior Judicial Service, 2019 by notifications dated 30th May, 2019 and 7th August, 2019 respectively and the recruitment was made in terms of the procedure prescribed under the Punjab Superior Judicial Services Rules, 2007/ Haryana Superior Judicial Services Rules, 2007.
5. It may be relevant to note that the posts came to be separately advertised under the Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Service Rules, 2007 but the process of selection is on the same standards except that language paper is separate and the applicants have to first qualify the written test followed with viva-voce with a restriction that candidate has to secure 40% or more marks in each paper and such of the qualified candidates who fall within three times of the number of vacancies are called for viva-voce but only such of the candidates will be considered to have successfully qualified the Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Service Examination unless in open category candidate obtains 50% marks and in reserved category candidate obtains 45% marks in the aggregate out of the total marks fixed for the written test and viva-voce. The format/pattern of examination is the same for both the recruitments held under the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 2007 and Haryana Superior Judicial Service Rules, 2007.
6. The appellant also applied pursuant to advertisement dated 30th May, 2019 and 7th August, 2019 with regard to Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Service Examination, 2019 and a common written examination was held for both the States of Punjab and Haryana, except Language Paper separately conducted from 29th November, 2019 to 1st December, 2019 and it reveals from the record that 118 candidates appeared in the State of Punjab and 230 in the State of Haryana.
7. Thus, in total 348 candidates participated in the selection process and appeared in the common written examination. The result of the written examination was declared on 18th December, 2019. In Punjab Superior Judicial Service, 3 candidates from open category and 1 candidate from backward category cleared the examination and qualified for viva-voce. At the same time, under the Haryana Superior Judicial Service, 11 candidates from open category out of which 3 candidates were common who qualified in both the States for viva voce.
8. The appellant, being disappointed of not being qualified in the written examination declared on 18th December 2019, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh under Article 226 of the Constitution with his threefold grievance:
(i) That in Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Services Rules, there is no condition regarding securing minimum marks in the main written examination and the condition in the advertisement of securing minimum 40% or more marks in each paper for qualifying for viva-voce is contrary to the Scheme of Rules.
(ii) Paper V (Criminal Law) was of 200 marks but at the commencement of the examination, the question paper handed over to the candidates was incomplete and it contained only 4 questions whose aggregate came out to be 160 marks instead of 200 marks as shown on the overleaf of the question paper, but when the candidates made complaint of the alleged discrepancy to the notice of the invigilator, after approx. one hour of the commencement of examinat
Selection into Judicial Service – Disclosure of marks in main examination before it is finalised and viva-voce conducted, would be against principles of transparency, rather it will invite criticism ....
Point of law: It is pertinent to note that the three law papers were evaluated by fifteen Evaluators by allotting one question to one Evaluator. Thus, one question was evaluated by one Evaluator only....
Public Service Commission - Civil service Examination - Public Service Commission have no power to relax the recruitment norms - Public Service Commission have no power to relax the recruitment norms
The duty of authorities to consider representations from aggrieved persons and the importance of considering subsequent developments in a case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
