Haryana Civil Judge 2021: High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Allegedly "Disproportionate Marks" Given In Interview

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has rejected a batch of petitions challenging alleged "disproportionate" marks awarded in the viva voce in Haryana Civil Judge 2021 examination.

The candidates contended that there was an unreasonable, arbitrary and "capricious assessment of their respective personalities." They also submitted that even though they secured high marks in mains exam, they were allotted "abysmally less marks" in the interview.

Observing that there is no evidence placed on record to prove the bias by the selection committee the plea was dismissed.

The Division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Kuldeep Tiwari Justice said, "it cannot be argued before this Court, that there was, as such, any reasonable likelihood of bias inhering in the mind(s) of the members of the selection committee, nor also it can be argued, that thereby there was any oblique/motive, thus working in the mind(s) of the members of the selection committee concerned."

It further added that the petitioners failed to prove that the member of selection committee were related to selected candidates, so as to prove that they acted bias.

Referring to Madan Lal and others v. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1995) and which was followed in Amlan Jyoti Borroah v. State of Assam  (2009), the Court said that the writ Courts are barred from acting as a "super assessor".

The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the marks allotted in the interview of Haryana  Civil Judge Exam- 2021 along with the other petitions relating to the exam.

Pertaining to the plea challenging the marks allotted to the candidates in the interview, it was argued that the candidates scored well in their written mains exam, however in the interview they were given marks "disproportionately."

Rejecting the argument the Court said, to set aside the marks given in interview the petitioners relied on High Court's decision in Subash Chander Sharma and others v. State of Haryana and other. , however, the position in that case was different. In case of Subhash Sharma the candidates were the relatives of the members of Public Service Commission, therefore the Court had declared the selection process as unfair and arbitrary which is not the case here, noted the Court.

The Court observed that "...there is no material placed on record, at the instance of the petitioners, that any of the members of the selection committee, rather selected those candidates, who were closely related to them, nor any evidence has emerged before this Court, thus displaying that the contesting respondent concerned, invited only those candidates for facing the viva-voce, despite theirs not obtaining the minimum qualifying marks in the written examination, nor any cogent material has been placed on record, whereons, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, thus can well contend, that there was any reasonable likelihood of bias working in the minds of the selection committee."

Consequently, the plea was dismissed stating that, there is "no merit in the petitions"  and the Court is constrained to dismiss them.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 194

Title: Moonak Garg and others v. Punjab and Haryana High Court and others

Click here to download/read the order.