Judicial Service | Prescribing Minimum Qualifying Marks For Interview Doesn't Contravene Judgment In All India Judges Case (2002): Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the Rules prescribing minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce/interview for the selection process in the judicial services examinations don't violate the Judgment of All India Judges Case (2002)."The Justice Shetty Commission was constituted to bring about uniformity in service conditions of judicial officers. The recommendations made by the Commission are in the nature of guidelines and those will have to be seen in the context of the Rules governing recruitment of judicial officers. By virtue of the decision in All India Judges (2002), it cannot be said that adequate elbow room was not available to prescribe qualifying marks in the interview segment to ensure the selection of the best possible person. Therefore, the prescription of minimum marks in the Rules is not found to be in contravention of the judgment in the All-India Judges (2002).", the Bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra said.In the All India Judges Case, the Supreme Court had accepted the recommendations provided by the Justice Shetty Commission but was silent on the aspect of minimum cut-off marks for the interview. Justice Shetty Commission suggested the procedure for the selection of judicial officers and specifically indicated that the interview segment shall carry 50 marks without any minimum cut-off marks. According to the commission's report, the prescription of minimum marks in the viva voce test was arbitrary and unreasonable.Taking reference to the All India Judges Case, it was contended by the writ petitioners that prescribing the minimum qualifying marks for the viva voce is against the dictum of the All India Judges Case as the Supreme Court in All India Judges Case had accepted all the recommendations of the Justice Shetty Commission, which had recommended that there shall be no minimum qualifying marks in the interview/viva voce.Rejecting such contention, the court negated the petitioner's reliance on the All India Judges Case. The court noted that the judgment in the All India Judges Case cannot be considered as having authoritatively pronounced on doing away with minimum cut-off marks in the interview segment."The above paragraph cannot persuade us to conclude that this Court accepted the recommendation of the Shetty Commission to do away with minimum marks for the interview. This is simply because in the preceding paragraphs, the Court listed various recommendations of the Shetty Commission. Dispensing with minimum marks for interview however finds no mention in the said list. Without such specific mention, it would be logical to say that the judgment in All India Judges (2002) is sub-silentio, on the aspect of minimum marks for interview.", the Judgment authored by Justice Hrishikesh Roy said.Also From The Judgment: Judicial Service | 'High Score In Written Exam Alone Doesn't Determine Merit': Supreme Court Upholds Minimum Mark Criteria For InterviewCase Title: ABHIMEET SINHA & ORS. VERSUS HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA & ORS.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 350Click here to read/download the judgment

Judicial Service | Prescribing Minimum Qualifying Marks For Interview Doesn't Contravene Judgment In All India Judges Case (2002): Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Judicial Service | Prescribing Minimum Qualifying Marks For Interview Doesn't Contravene Judgment In All India Judges Case (2002): Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers