Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Overall, the trend indicates a preference for moderate allocation (around 12-15%) of total marks for viva voce, with exceptions for certain categories, and an emphasis on avoiding arbitrary high percentages that could distort merit-based selection ["Javid Iqbal VS State Of J. &K. - Jammu and Kashmir"], ["Sarika VS State Of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:["State of Mysore: Krishna Krishna Avadhani VS K. N. Chandrasekhara, K. V. Jayarama, N. S. Asawasthanarayana Rao, M. R. Narasimhamurty, M. N. Sheshagiri, M. S. Subaravappa, V. K. Kulkarni, R. U. Gaulay, Mumtaz Ahmad Khan, S. S. Jamboti, T. R. Walveka, Mo - Supreme Court"]["Vikram Singh And Others, Petitioners VS Subordinate Service Selection Board, Haryana - 1988 0 Supreme(P&H) 217"]["Parvez Ali Ahmed S/O- Ashraf Ali Ahmed vs State Of Assam - Gauhati"]["Janak Raj VS State - 1990 0 Supreme(J&K) 53"]["Pilla Suneetha VS Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission - Andhra Pradesh"]["Sushil Kumar Pandey VS High Court of Jharkhand - Supreme Court"]["PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293"]["Javid Iqbal VS State Of J. &K. - Jammu and Kashmir"]["State of Rajasthan VS Beni Prasad Sharma - 1987 0 Supreme(Raj) 65"]["Hage Lampu S/o Late Hage Hailiang VS Gauhati High Court - Gauhati"]["Roben Ezung G/T(Maths) Gms Yenechucho, Dis, Wokha, Nagaland VS State Of Nagaland - Gauhati"]["Anil Kumar Gupta VS Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, The Allahabad Bank - Patna"]["MANN JANARDDANAM NAIR vs STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS - Kerala"]["Jogendra Singh : Ranjeet Singh : Mani Ram Sharma : Phool Chand Poonia : Dilip Singh VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan"]["Sarika VS State Of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana"]
In public service recruitments across India, the viva voce—or oral interview—plays a crucial role in evaluating candidates' personality, communication skills, and suitability for demanding roles. However, a common query arises: all the judgements with respect to percentage marks of viva in a public service selection. Candidates and authorities often debate the fairness of allocating marks to viva voce and setting minimum qualifying thresholds. Courts, particularly the Supreme Court, have addressed this extensively, balancing the need for subjective assessment with principles of fairness under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. This post analyzes key case law, judicial guidelines, and trends to clarify what percentages are generally acceptable and when they may be deemed arbitrary. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice—consult a lawyer for individual cases. PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293
Viva voce complements written exams by testing traits like leadership and maturity, essential for services such as IAS or judicial roles. Courts recognize its importance but stress it must not overshadow objective tests. The discretion to fix viva marks lies with expert bodies like Public Service Commissions, tailored to service needs, candidate age, and maturity levels. PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293State of Rajasthan VS Beni Prasad Sharma - 1987 0 Supreme(Raj) 65
No universal formula exists; percentages vary by context. For instance, the percentage of marks for viva voce... is primarily a matter for the expertise and discretion of the recruiting authorities. PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293
This pivotal case ruled that allocating over 12.2% of total marks to viva voce for IAS-like services is excessive and arbitrary. The Court permitted minimum qualifying marks but limited them to about one-third of viva allocation—e.g., no more than 10 out of 30 viva marks (~33%). High viva weightage risks nepotism, violating equality. Sangeeta Chingakham VS Regional Institute of Medical Sciences - 2019 0 Supreme(Manipur) 35
Here, 25% viva marks were upheld if the process was fair and impartial. The Court noted, the importance of viva voce varies with the nature of the service, and fixed percentages are not sacrosanct but must be justified. State of Rajasthan VS Beni Prasad Sharma - 1987 0 Supreme(Raj) 65
Reiterating reasonableness, the Court struck down arbitrary high minimums, emphasizing they must not vitiate selections. PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293
Lower courts have echoed these principles, often scrutinizing post-process changes. In a Manipur Judicial Service case, executive instructions imposing a 40% viva cut-off after written exams were invalidated: Petitioner had no notice about minimum cut-off for viva-voce segment which was introduced just on eve of viva-voce test... It is violative of Article 14. The court declared the candidate successful based on 50.6% aggregate, granting notional seniority. Salam Samarjeet Singh VS High Court of Manipur At Imphal - 2024 7 Supreme 68
Another ruling affirmed no hard and fast rules for viva percentages: It must vary from service to service according to the requirements of the service the minimum qualification prescribed. The age group... and a host of other factors. For ASI Police, 33% viva marks were upheld absent arbitrariness. Subhash Chander VS State of Punjab - 2006 Supreme(P&H) 1294
In Rajya Sabha Security Assistant selections, a multi-stage process (written, physical, interview) was fair as interview wasn't decisive: The interview stage was not the sole determining factor... each stage was given due weightage. Mahesh Kumar VS Union of India - 2008 Supreme(Del) 649
Courts have cautioned against excessive viva marks for fresh graduates: it would not be reasonable to have percentage of viva voce marks more than 15 per cent of the total marks in selection of candidates fresh from college/school. 25.75% was deemed arbitrary in one instance. KALABAI PRAMOD RAUT VS SELECTION COMMITTEE, ANGANWADI SEWIKA AND HELPER, LAKHANDUR - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 613Kishore Kalita VS Brahmaputra Board - 2006 Supreme(Gau) 116
For Gujarat Engineering Services, viva marks didn't negate written scores, and delays didn't prove mala fides. RAJESHKUMAR JAIN VS GUJARAT STATE PUBLIC SERVICECOMMISSION - 2005 Supreme(Guj) 570
In medical admissions, 33% viva for ex-service officers was struck down as arbitrary, aligning with 15% benchmarks. GAURAV KHANNA VS SECRETARY, KAMLA NEHRU MEMORIAL HOSPITAL - 2001 Supreme(All) 361
Fixing a minimum percentage (e.g., one-third or 33%) of marks in viva voce as a qualifying criterion has been struck down when it results in candidates being unfairly excluded. PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293
Public Service Commissions should:- Align viva allocation (12-25%) with judicial norms.- Set moderate minimums, justified by service demands.- Ensure pre-notice of criteria; no mid-process alterations.- Maintain impartial, expert panels.
Candidates can challenge if viva dominates (e.g., >25%) or minimums exclude fairly scoring applicants, citing Article 14. However, courts defer to experts absent mala fides. Subhash Chander VS State of Punjab - 2006 Supreme(P&H) 1294
| Aspect | Judicial View ||--------|---------------|| Viva % of Total | 12-25% generally acceptable PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293 || Minimum in Viva | ~33% of viva marks, if reasonable Sangeeta Chingakham VS Regional Institute of Medical Sciences - 2019 0 Supreme(Manipur) 35 || High Allocations | Scrutinized; >15% for juniors risky KALABAI PRAMOD RAUT VS SELECTION COMMITTEE, ANGANWADI SEWIKA AND HELPER, LAKHANDUR - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 613 || Process Changes | Invalid without notice Salam Samarjeet Singh VS High Court of Manipur At Imphal - 2024 7 Supreme 68 || Overall | Fair, transparent, service-specific State of Rajasthan VS Beni Prasad Sharma - 1987 0 Supreme(Raj) 65 |
Judicial trends affirm viva voce's role but demand proportionality. Allocations beyond 12-25% or harsh minimums (e.g., 33%+) may be arbitrary, as seen in Ashok Kumar Yadav and others. Authorities must justify criteria; candidates, aggregate performance. Stay informed on rules—fair processes build trust in public service selections. For tailored advice, seek professional legal counsel.
References:PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHAPATRA VS CHAIRMAN, BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK - 1994 0 Supreme(Ori) 293State of Rajasthan VS Beni Prasad Sharma - 1987 0 Supreme(Raj) 65Sangeeta Chingakham VS Regional Institute of Medical Sciences - 2019 0 Supreme(Manipur) 35Salam Samarjeet Singh VS High Court of Manipur At Imphal - 2024 7 Supreme 68Subhash Chander VS State of Punjab - 2006 Supreme(P&H) 1294Mahesh Kumar VS Union of India - 2008 Supreme(Del) 649KALABAI PRAMOD RAUT VS SELECTION COMMITTEE, ANGANWADI SEWIKA AND HELPER, LAKHANDUR - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 613Kishore Kalita VS Brahmaputra Board - 2006 Supreme(Gau) 116RAJESHKUMAR JAIN VS GUJARAT STATE PUBLIC SERVICECOMMISSION - 2005 Supreme(Guj) 570GAURAV KHANNA VS SECRETARY, KAMLA NEHRU MEMORIAL HOSPITAL - 2001 Supreme(All) 361
#VivaVoceMarks #PublicServiceLaw #SupremeCourtRulings
, candidates who had secured a higher percentage of marks at the viva voce test could not be excluded. ... For selection at the competitive examination marks obtained at the viva voce test together with the marks obtained at the written examination were undoubtedly the sole test, but for the purpose of promotion the Public Service Commission had to take into account the assessment of suitability for promotion ... Some of the petitio....
According to the affidavit, allocation for viva voce marks was 12½% of the written marks which percentage is definitely not taken from Ashok Kumar Yadav s case (supra) because there the percentage of marks was of the total marks including that of viva. ... Having discussed above the various authorities cited by the learned counsel, it becomes clear that even in Ashok Kumar Yadav s case (AIR 1987 SC 454) (supra), the scope of percentage#HL_E....
(2000) 7 SCC 719 , the Supreme Court observed that there is no rule of thumb with regard to allotment of percentage of marks for interview. ... In the said affidavit-in-opposition so filed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 5, it was mentioned that 60 marks was fixed for viva voce which was distributed amongst the three members in 20 marks each and therefore there was no excessive mark allotted for viva voce. ... in the viva-voce test compared to all other candidates includi....
least at the prescribed minimum in the written examination would qualify for the viva voce; and (iii) there was no cut-off applicable in respect of the marks to be obtained in the viva voce while drawing up the merit list in the aggregate.” ... Thus, the percentage of marks scored by the petitioner cumulatively stands at 50.6 percent. It is also pertinent to note that the Manipur High Court subsequently on 9.3.2016 amended Schedule-B, Sub-rule(3) to prescribe 40% minimum cut-off for th....
We do not therefore propose to set aside the selection made by the Haryana Public Service Commission though they have been made on the basis of an unduly high percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test. ... 16. ... Now if the allocation of such a high percentage of marks as 33.3% in case of ex-service officers and 22.2% in case of other candidates, for the viva voce test is excessive, as held by us, what....
Selection based on merit, tested impartially and objectively, is the essential foundation of any useful and efficient public service. So, open competitive examination has come to be accepted almost universally as the gateway to public services. ... The petitioner is aggrieved of the minimum marks criterion introduced in the viva-voce conducted during the selection process. ... While there was a detailed discussion on the perks, mode of recruitment to the Higher Judici....
The contesting respondent is the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission being the selecting authority and the 2nd respondent-State is the appointing authority. ... stage of selection process, which apparently is the viva voce stage. ... and the viva voce is for 20 marks. ... qualify or to be considered in the next stage of the selection process i.e., viva voce. ... “There are no minimum marks for the viva voce”. ....
In that respect, the instant matter is fully covered by the decisions of this Court in MCD vs. Surender Singh, (2019) 8 SCC 67 : (2019) 2 SCC (L&S) 464 and Jharkhand Public Service Commission vs. ... That is why Rule 10(ii), Part C speaks of “selection for appointment.” Even as there is no constraint on the State Government in respect of the number of appointments to be made, there is no constraint on the Government fixing a higher score of marks for the purpose of selection#....
It must vary from service to service according to the requirements of the service the minimum qualification prescribed. The age group from which the selection is to be made, the body to which the task of holding the viva voce test is proposed to be entrusted and a host of other factors. ... The basic rationale discernible from the judgements of the Supreme Court in Lila Dhar’s case (supra), Ashok Kumar Yadav’s case (supra) and Mohinder Sain Garg’s case (supra) is that there are no hard....
We would suggest that this percentage should also be adopted by the Public Service Commissions in other States, because it is desirable that there should be uniformity in the selection process throughout the country and the practice followed by the Union Public Service Commission should be taken as a ... The percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test in case of ex-service officers may, for reasons we have....
A plain reading of the judgment makes it clear that the Court in this case held so on the basis of two factors- (i) that around 1200 candidates were called for interviews against 54 vacancies, and (ii) Selection rules provided for a composite process of selection namely written examination and interview. Another case relied on by the petitioners is Mohinder Sain Garg v. State of Punjab and Ors. (supra) where it was held that the percentage of viva voce test in that case at 25% of the total marks was arbitrary and excessive. The case of the petitioners in contradistinction differ on both the ....
Further observing that: "There could be no gainsaying that viva voce test cannot be totally dispensed with, but taking note of situation and conditions prevailing in our country, it would not be reasonable to have percentage of viva voce marks more than 15 per cent of the total marks in selection of candidates.” State of Punjab, (1991)1 see 642 where the ratio of viva voce marks to written examination marks was 25.75 per cent, the Apex Court observed that such percentage of marks was arbitrary and excessive.
However, noticing that the selected candidates had already joined their posts, the process was not interfered with. It ruled that though the viva voce test cannot be totally dispensed with but taking note of the situation and conditions prevailing in our country, it would not be reasonable to have the percentage of viva voce marks more than 15% of the total marks in selection of candidates fresh from college/school for public employment by direct recruitment where rules provide for composite process of selection, namely, written examination and interview. The Apex Court aft....
For the said selection, the State Public Service Commission had assigned 100 marks for viva voce as against the 40 marks for other criteria. The Honble Court found the said allotment of marks to be discriminatory and capable of being abused or misused. ( 8 ) IN the matter of Inder Parkash Gupta (supra), the subject-matter of challenge was selection made by the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service commission for appointment to the posts in Medical Education Service.
It held that percentage of marks in the case of ex-service officers in viva voce test being 33. In Mohinder Sen Garg v. State of Punjab, 1991 (1) SCC 662 and in Munindra Kumar v. Rajiv Govil, 1991 (3) SCC 368 : (AIR 1991 SC 1607) the Apex Court held that where there is a written test and interview, 15% marks in all are to be kept for interview. 3% was unduly high and suffer from vice of arbitrariness.
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
