Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 475 (GUJ)

Y. N. GADHVI v. GUJARAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

2001-07-10

P.B.MAJMUDAR

body2001
P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner who is a Government servant serving under the Directorate of Marketing and Inspection Department of Government of India had applied for appearing in the Class-I and II Gujarat Civil Services Examination which was undertaken by the Gujarat Public Service Commission ("the GPSC" for short ). The petitioner had appeared in the written examination which was held as back as in June, 1986. Subsequently, the petitioner was called for personal interview which was held on 6. 5. 1988. The result was declared on 13. 11. 1988. The petitioner came to know that he has secured 328 marks out of total 600 marks. It is averred in para 4 of the petition that the petitioner came to know that he has secured only 24 marks out of total 80 marks so far as the oral interview is concerned. On the basis of the aforesaid marks, in aggregate, the petitioner secured 352 marks out of total 680 marks. It is the case of the petitioner that in the oral interview, one of the members of the Board tried to favour some candidates. It is also his say that relevant questions were not asked in the oral interview. The aforesaid selection is, therefore, challenged on the ground that oral interview was not taken in a proper manner and that members of the Interviewing Committee acted in a mala fide manner and tried to favour certain candidates. ( 2 ) SOME allegations are also made against one of the members of the Selection Committee, namely, Mr. B. K. Gadhvi. It is averred in para 9 of the petition that since he belongs to the sub-caste Maru-Gadhvi community, he has given more marks to the candidates belonging to the said community. It is stated in the said para that right of the petitioner to be selected on Class-I and II post is adversely affected due to the tendency of favouritism and nepotism adopted by the members of the Selection Committee. In the petition, basic averment is made regarding mala fide and arbitrary behaviour on the part of the members of the Selection Committee. ( 3 ) ON the basis of the aforesaid averments in the petition, it is prayed that the result declared on 13. 11. In the petition, basic averment is made regarding mala fide and arbitrary behaviour on the part of the members of the Selection Committee. ( 3 ) ON the basis of the aforesaid averments in the petition, it is prayed that the result declared on 13. 11. 1988 for the post of Class-I and II by the GPSC should be quashed and set aside and the respondent should be directed to reconsider and reappreciate the result of the petitioner. ( 4 ) THE affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the Deputy Secretary of the GPSC wherein the averments made in the petition are denied. In para 6, it is stated that Interviewing Committee had interviewed the petitioner and thereafter his performance was judged by the Board. In para 7 of the reply, it is stated that it is true that the petitioner had secured 328 marks out of 600 marks in the written test and that he has secured 24 marks out of 80 marks in the oral interview and as a result thereof the petitioner had secured 352 marks out of 680 marks in aggregate. In para 12 it is stated that the written test carries 600 marks whereas the oral interview carries only 80 marks and grand total is to be considered for the purpose of selection of the candidates. It is stated that only 11. 76% of total marks is attributed to oral interview and that weightage given to the oral interview is much less. The marks obtained by other candidates are also mentioned at page 30 of the reply which are as under: