Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 137 (JK)

Rakesh Singh v. State Of J. &K.

2001-07-13

T.S.DOABIA

body2001
1. If there can be manipulation or dishonesty in allotting marks at interviews, there can equally be manipulation in the matter of awarding marks in the written examination. In the ultimate analysis, whatever method is adopted its success depends on the moral standards of the members constituting the selection committee and their sense of objectively and devotion to duty. This criticism is mere a reflection on the examiners than on the system itself. 2. The above observation made by the Supreme Court in the case of R. Chitralekha Vs. State of Mysore, AIR 1964 SC 1823. It was further observed that:- "The scheme of selection, however perfect it may be abused in practice. That it is capable of abuse is not a ground for quashing it. So long as the order lays down relevant objective criteria and entrusts the business of selection to qualified persons, this court cannot obviously have any say in the matter. In this case the criteria laid down by the Government are certainly relevant in the matter of awarding marks at the interview." 3. In Chitralekhas case, the larger question that selection by interview is inherently repugnant to the doctrine of equality embolded in Article 14 of the Constitution was considered and the argument that the subjective satisfaction of the Selecting Authority requires to be checked was not accepted. It was observed :- "We cannot accept such a wide contention and condemn one of the well accepted mode of selection in educational institutions. James Hart in his "An Introduction to Administrative Law" observes, at p. 180 thus: "A test or examination, to be comparative, must employ an objective standard of measures. Where the standard or measure is wholly subjective to the examiners, it differs in effect in no respect from an uncontrolled opinion of the examiners and cannot be termed competitive." In the field of education there are divergent views as regards the mode of testing the capacity and calibro of students in the matter of admissions to colleges. Orthodox educationists stand by the marks obtained by a student in the annual examination. The modern trend of opinion insists upon other additional tests, such as interview, performance in extra curricular activities, personality test, psychiatric tests, etc. Obviously we are not in a position to judge which method is preferable or which test is the correct one." 4. Orthodox educationists stand by the marks obtained by a student in the annual examination. The modern trend of opinion insists upon other additional tests, such as interview, performance in extra curricular activities, personality test, psychiatric tests, etc. Obviously we are not in a position to judge which method is preferable or which test is the correct one." 4. In this regard reference may also be made to another decision reported as ˜Lila Dhar Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, AIR 1981 SC 1777. The matrix of the written and the process of interview were considered, it was observed, that importance to be attached to the interview must be minimal. The relevant observation are as under:- In the United Nations Hand Book on Civil Service Laws and Practice it is said: ".....The written papers permit an assessment of culture and intellectual competence. The interview permits an assessment of qualities of character which written papers ignore; it attempts to assess the man himself and not his intellectual abilities." Thus, the written examination assesses the mans intellect and the interview test the man himself and "the twin shall meet" for a proper selection. If both written examination and interview test are to be essential features of proper selection, the questions may arise as to the weight to be attached respectively to them. In the case of admission to a college, for instance, where the candidates personality is yet to develop and it is too early to identify the personal qualities for which greater importance may have to be attached in later life, greater weight has perforce to be given to performance in the written examination. The importance to be attached to the interview test must be minimal." 5. It is in the light of above, the facts in those two petitions be examined. The appointment of private respondents against the post of Junior Assistant is the pay scale of Rs. 950-1500 is being challenged. It is submitted that the petitioners were fully qualified and they submit that the selection of private respondents can not be sustained because:- i) Official respondents did not conduct any viva- voce test; and ii) That the appointment have been made on the basis of written test. It is stated, that respondent No. 8 namely Arti Jasrotia is not capable of typing 30 w.p.m. Similar assertion is made vis-a-vis respondents 9 and 10. 6. It is stated, that respondent No. 8 namely Arti Jasrotia is not capable of typing 30 w.p.m. Similar assertion is made vis-a-vis respondents 9 and 10. 6. Thus it is stated that the selection of the private respondents only on the basis of written test is bad. 7. In view of the above factual and legal position, the grievance of the petitioners that there has necessarily to be an interview is an argument which cannot be accepted. The selection made on the basis of written test can not be said to be bad. These petition are found to be without merit and are dismissed.