Minimum qualifying marks must be obtained in each subject rather than an aggregate score; changes to recruitment criteria cannot be made after the process has commenced.

JUDGMENT :

NIKHIL S. KARIEL, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Megha Jani and learned advocate Mr. Dhruv Toliya for the petitioners of Special Civil Application No.20966 of 2023 and 11655 of 2023 respectively, learned Government Pleader Mr. Gurusharan Virk with learned AGP Ms. Dharitri Pancholi for the respondent State and learned advocate Mr. Jay S. Thakker for the respondent Nos. 5 to 10.

2. Since both the petitions are questioning the result declared pursuant to a common selection process and since the submissions and questions of law are also identical, therefore, both the petitions are taken up for final hearing jointly.

3. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP / learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

4. As observed hereinabove, since a common issue has been raised, the facts of Special Civil Application No.20966 of 2023 are being referred to.

5. The facts leading to filing of the present petition in brief being that the petitioners had applied for selection, to the post of Sub-Inspector / Instructor, Grade III, under the Director, General Home Guards, Department of Home, Government of Gujarat, conducted by the Gujarat Subordinate Selection Board, the respondent No.3 hereinafter as referred to be as Selection Board initiated vide advertisement No.187/2021 dated 09.01.2021.

6. The selection process initiated vide the advertisement, was based upon the Recruitment Rules being ‘the Sub-Inspector / Instructor, Class III (Competitive Examination for Direct Recruitment) Rules, 2016, issued by the State Government vide Notification dated 28.10.2016. As per the Recruitment Rules, the examination was to be conducted in three successive stages namely; (1) preliminary examination, (2) physical examination and (3) main examination. The bone of contention being the declaration of result based upon the main examination, the same would be addressed in the present petition. It appears that the main examination was consisting of four different papers namely; (1) Gujarati, (2) English, (3) Psychological test and (4) Legal matters; each question paper consisted of 100 marks and whereas the Recruitment Rules specified that the Selection Board would fix the qualifying standard for main examination and whereas it was clarified that minimum qualifying standard determined by the Board shall not in any case be less than 40% of marks in the written test. It appears that the petitioners had applied for selection and had cleared the preliminary examination and the physical test and whereas the petitioners were thus, entitled for appearing in the main examination. It is the case of the petitioners that the main examination was held in the month of May, 2023, in which 44 candidates had appeared and whereas while initially the Board had declared a result of 10 successful candidates, the petitioners had not been informed about their result qua the said selection and later on, the Selection Board had published a list of 10 successful candidates and 31 unsuccessful candidates, which included the petitioners. The case of the petitioners being more particularly based upon the list, which also contained marks secured by the successful as well as unsuccessful candidates that the respo