Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the selection process for the post of Excise Inspectors under the Haryana Excise and Taxation Inspectorate (State Service, Class III) Rules, 1969. The appellants, Vikram Singh and another, were declared successful in the written examination held in 1985 but contested the allocation of marks for the viva voce test, which constituted 28.5% of the total marks. They argued that this allocation was arbitrary and contrary to the principles established in the case of Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana. The High Court upheld the selection board's rules, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court analyzed the legality of the viva voce marks allocation and determined that the principles from Ashok Kumar Yadav's case were applicable. The court noted that the appellants had been correctly selected in the first interview but faced an illegal second interview process. Ultimately, the court directed the respondents to appoint the appellants as Excise Inspectors if they were found suitable, allowing for their appointment despite any overage status. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to fair selection criteria in public service appointments.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Selection Process - Allocation of Marks - Haryana Excise and Taxation Inspectorate (State Service, Class III) Rules, 1969, Section 28 - The allocation of 100 marks for the viva voce test was deemed arbitrary as it constituted 28.5% of total marks, contrary to the principles established in Ashok Kumar Yadav's case. The court held that the principle from the previous case applied to the current selection process, necessitating adherence to fair selection criteria (Paras 88-89). B) Administrative Law - Appointment - Validity of Selections - Haryana Excise and Taxation Inspectorate (State Service, Class III) Rules, 1969 - The court found that despite the second interview being illegal, it was not just to cancel the selections already made, as the selected candidates had joined their posts. The court directed the respondents to appoint the appellants if found suitable, regardless of any overage status (Paras 89-90).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the allocation of 100 marks for the viva voce test out of a total of 350 marks was arbitrary and contrary to established legal principles.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, held that the allocation of marks for the viva voce test was arbitrary, and directed the respondents to appoint the appellants as Excise Inspectors if found suitable, disregarding any overage status.
Law Points
- Selection criteria
- Viva voce test
- Arbitrary rules
- Appointment process
