The allocation of marks for the viva voce test in a selection process for public service is not arbitrary or unreasonable and does not violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, provided that the test is a valid method of assessing a candidate's suitability for the post and that the percentage of marks allocated for the test is not excessive.

UJAGAR SINGH, J.

1. The mandate of the Constitution that the state shall not deny to any person equality before law or equal protection of law, as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India and that of equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any public office as provided in Art.16 thereof, are the principal questions referred to this Bench qua the present case. The idea of formal equality before law in many aspects of human-life is said to be only sham and the Courts have been endeavouring to make people equal who are really unequal. We have instances that every individual has his own different circumstances from almost all others. Taking a practical view, we can imagine that an individual born and brought up in particular circumstances is unable to claim equality with another individual in different circumstances. Some individuals get education just for getting it. Family circumstances cannot permit him to devote time for going to libraries, joining gatherings of good society and be one with those who have higher status or live in a better sphere of life. Except during school/college hours, he may be required by his family to devote and utilize the whole time in carrying on his family profession, such as agriculture, petty job and labour etc. We can well imagine that he will have no chance to acquire general knowledge talent and many other such aspects. It is said that equality does not imply that individuals are identical or equal in intelligence, but under the Constitution, all human beings are entitled to be treated as if they are equal in every respect. Every citizen a right to certain kinds of equal treatment his mandate does not require that every individual has a right to have equal share of economic or political power. The differences in social or economic positions of individuals can be removed after minimum basis of civilisation is attained by the country as a whole. All the same the enforcement of this mandate by the administrative officials some times involves some sort of deliberateness or intentional discrimination and where this deliberateness or intentional discrimination comes in the jurisdiction of the Court is attracted.

2. The appointment to a public office requires some guidelines and for that purpose, various service rules have been framed wherein qualifications and other tests have been prescribed. In most of the cases, a candidate for being selected is required to cover a written test and viva-voce and minimum marks for qualifying are also prescribed. The consensus of opinion has been that written test and some minimum marks required to go through the same is a must. The consciousness of the individual about their claim to equality before law and equality of opportunity for public services has given rise to various disputes coming to various Courts. There have been various decisions on the aspect and always new points can arise to reopen the dictum of the earlier judgements.

3. In this case, an advertisement was published on 7-8-1985, inviting applications for 11 posts of Excise Inspectors for Excise and Taxation Department, Haryana. Out of 11 posts, 4 were Reserved for scheduled Castes; 1 for backward classes and 2 for Ex-servicemen of Haryana Scale of the post was Rs. 600-20-30-850/900-40-1100. The only relevant part of the advertisement in this case is that there was to be a written examination in some subjects carrying 100 marks each and the paper in Hindi was to carry 50 marks. The minimum qualifying marks were fixed to be 33% in each paper and 40% in the aggregate. The rules relating to this service are the Haryana Excise and Taxation Inspectorate (State Service Class III) Rules, 1969 published vide Haryana Government Notification No. G.S.R. 180/Const/Art.309/69 dt. 22-10-1069. Rule 4 to Appendix D of these Rules prescribes the subjects of examination as under :

(1) English - - 100 marks

(2) Hindi(in Devnagri Script) - 50