INTERVIEW या FIXING? WRITTEN TOPPER REJECTED, SC SHOCKED | #supremecourtofindia

本站添加: 2026-05-30

[00:00:00]Three petitioners before your lordship, my lord, they secured fairly good marks in the written parts.

[00:00:06]There were two papers. In this case, my lord, these petitioners secured high marks in the written exams.

[00:00:13]>> And the interview [music] panel interviews the candidate, panelists are not aware of the marks which is awarded, my lord.

[00:00:20]>> Sir, they may not be aware. I'm not aware.

[00:00:21]>> Sir, it is very relevant when there is a question of bias and thereby fixing a particular number so that the candidate >> No, I agree, but they are aware of the fact that this interview has a minimum cut-off. Now, if, my lord, for some reason I'm not saying that >> Of course, a member of the selection committee will know that suppose out [music] of 100, suppose 100 marks are awarded >> Yeah.

[00:00:45]>> he or she will know that unless this candidate is awarded 40 marks he he will get only disqualified. This much >> He will stand disqualified.

[00:00:54]>> This much he will know because >> Yes, of course.

[00:01:10]recruitment to the higher judicial service in Maharashtra. So, what happened was that 42 vacancies were advertised. 2,751 people took the preliminary exam. 421 were found fit to take the main exam.

[00:01:26]Only 43 were called for viva and only 13 were selected. Now, the three petitioners before your lordship, my lord, they secured fairly good marks in the written parts.

[00:01:39]There were two papers, both of 100 marks, and there was a interview of 50 marks. They have been Yes. Yes.

[00:01:48]>> This rule is mandatory in all states that they have to not only qualify the minimum marks in the written exam.

[00:01:55]There is a minimum This is available also.

[00:01:58]>> This is one problem because my lord this issue has been examined by this court in several cases. Unfortunately, there are some contradictory judgements of this court whether minimum marks can be prescribed for the interview. There are two issues. One is whether more than a certain percentage of the total marks can be prescribed for the interview. And the second is whether minimum cut-off marks for the interview itself can be prescribed. On both those issues my lord, there are several judgements of this court which say that the maximum marks for the interview should not be more than 12% or something like that as compared to the total number of marks. And there are some judgements which also say that there should not be a minimum cut-off.

[00:02:42]>> No, that you are referring to Ashok Yadav and 60% also.

[00:02:45]>> That's right.

[00:02:46]>> That's a different issue. Suppose 12% are prescribed >> Yeah.

[00:02:51]>> for the >> minimum cut-off your lordship. Now the question is my lord, what is happening is this minimum cut-off, just as my lord prescribing too many marks for the interview has been found to be arbitrary in Ashok Yadav etc. that the large percentage cannot be prescribed for the interview. If you prescribe a minimum cut-off marks and my lord it gives a kind of arbitrary power to those who are in the interview panel to fail people just on account of the interview.

[00:03:22]>> Normally in every high court >> Yes.

[00:03:24]>> Justice himself and the senior most judges will sit for interview.

[00:03:29]Now in judicial services, the how the candidate react to a question, how he behaves, the body language, the temperament, all these factors are very important.

[00:03:38]>> There could be, but it could also be possible my lord that some judge who's in the interview panel, he kind of takes a dislike to a particular candidate for some reason.

[00:03:50]And dislike can always be very subjective. He has worn a particular dress or he speaks in a particular manner etc. And therefore my lord gives him very low marks in the interview effectively fails him in the interview.

[00:04:04]That is why my lord when this issue has been agitated and my lord this has been happening now consistently in many judicial service examinations. I am finding I have dealt with so many cases of judicial service examinations.

[00:04:17]Vacancies advertised are X. The number of people finally selected are 1/4 or 1/5 of X. The and the major reason for people not being selected is that they have failed the cut off. Sometimes my lord they fail the cut off of the written exams. But very often they fail the cut off of the of the interview. In this case my lord these petitioners secured high marks in the written exams and in fact one of them secured the third highest marks in the written exam and she has been given 18 out of 40 in the interview. 18 out of 50 sorry. The minimum cut off was 20. So that is why my lord >> think that any selection committee will have any idea about the written examination. With the consistent practice that nobody will come to know that what is the position merit position in the written exam. At least 19 2019 18 I have been regularly associated.

[00:05:16]>> Yes.

[00:05:17]>> There is no question of knowing it anyway.

[00:05:19]>> No question of knowing?

[00:05:20]>> The written marks >> marks. But now of course my lord people are given marks even under RTI they are disclosed them.

[00:05:27]>> No Mr. Bhushan you you not got us right.

[00:05:30]What we are saying is when the interview panel interviews the candidate the panelists are not aware of the marks which is awarded.

[00:05:39]>> Sir they may not be aware. I'm not saying >> That is very relevant when there is a question of bias thereby fixing a particular number so that they can >> No, I agree, but they are aware of the fact that this interview has a minimum cut off. Now, if my lord for some reason I'm not saying that >> Of course, a member of the selection committee will know that suppose out of 100 suppose 100 marks are for Yes. He or she will know that unless this candidate is awarded 40 marks.

[00:06:10]>> Yes.

[00:06:11]>> He can be disqualified.

[00:06:13]>> He will stand disqualified.

[00:06:15]>> This much he will know because minimum marks are prescribed. But he will not come to know that in the written >> He may not come to know that.

[00:06:22]>> Subsequently, but here you have not challenged the rule. You have not challenged the rule in this case.

[00:06:28]>> My lord, effectively that's what it comes to. What what I have said is that it is arbitrary. What we have said is it is arbitrary to fail us on the basis of just the interview marks, not receiving the cut off on the of the interview marks. Actually, my lord, this is a larger issue which I feel, my lord, this court needs to revisit in a larger Unfortunately, there are several benches decisions. Some say that minimum cut off cannot be prescribed. Others say minimum cut off can be prescribed. There are also judgments which say as in regarding that Kothari Commission etc. that the maximum marks for the interview should be 12.5%. Ashok Yadav etc. Here, of course, the marks for the interview are 20%. And in that 20% marks for the interview, the minimum qualification marks for is 40 >> Ashok Yadav also, you will see, Mr. Bhushan, that for the higher posts which are based upon experience, the even there also recommendation is that higher marks for viva voce.

[00:07:34]But for say for example, if you are recruiting newly graduates law graduates >> for the lower judiciary >> lower judiciary for the entry level.

[00:07:43]>> Yes.

[00:07:43]>> Then marks will be minimum at 12% or something.

[00:07:46]>> Mhm.

[00:07:47]>> But written examination will be more, but if you go for a district judge >> Yes.

[00:07:52]>> Then you are examining a person, you are interviewing a person who had 10 year, 12 year, 7 year minimum practice to his credit.

[00:08:00]>> Now the question is, my lord, whether there should be a minimum cut-off for the interview or not. This is the question.

[00:08:07]>> So Bhushan, how can you permit a candidate who knew very well when he appeared in the exam? He took a chance.

[00:08:13]>> I'm de-horsed then. I'm I'm on a larger issue. I think, my lord, the time has come for this court to revisit this issue as to I agree that interview can be there, interview should be there.

[00:08:25]But the question is what should be the maximum marks, percentage of marks for the interview for every each exam? And number two, my lord, what should whether there can be a minimum cut-off for the interview?

[00:08:39]Because some courts have >> For that Bhushan, my lord, we are always open to examine that. For that to be judicial services matter is pending before the three judge bench.

[00:08:49]>> Yes.

[00:08:49]>> Right now with me I Justice Vinod Chandran and Justice Maseeh there. It was earlier the judgement in the judicial service the recent judgements are by that bench. So there may be that someone can apply and you can also assist on that after collating a comparative information chart from different >> So I I am happy to do that because I have appeared in several such cases of several judicial higher judicial service in several states.

[00:09:17]>> See, at least one thing should be one can be easily argued and that though it is the state prerogative, that states have their own service rules, that power is there with the state.

[00:09:28]But a uniform pattern can be introduced.

[00:09:32]Minimum with a uniform pattern.

[00:09:34]>> Actually, in several cases, at least in three cases, your lordship, this court has said that the mere fact that only 1/4 of the vacancies have been filled up by this exam shows the first case was that Center for Public Interest Litigation regarding the Delhi Lower Judiciary. Where my lord, 8,000 people had appeared for the judicial services, 80 vacancies were there, and only 12 people were selected. So, the court felt that was Justice Deepak Mishra's judgment. The court felt that look, there appears to be some problem with this evaluation. Therefore, my lord, they appointed a re-examining committee under Justice Sikri, etc. And thereafter, my lord, many more people, another 15 people got selected. So, that's why this court has in several cases been examining this issue as to whether I'm sorry. Whether such an evaluation, my lord, is appropriate or not, and therefore it has asked other committees to examine it. I feel, my lord, that in this case also, your lordship can ask for that examination. Of course, here there are only three petitioners before your lordship.

[00:10:46]>> So, who's to get to see the other consequences, means the candidate must have told you who are the the judges in the interview committee. And particularly in High Court like Maharashtra, >> Chief was not there, I'm told. Chief Justice was not there in the interview.

[00:11:00]>> In some of these High Courts, >> And my lord, despite the fact that 7-8 minutes were per person.

[00:11:08]>> Total Total >> I'm told that for 43 candidates were called for the interview, the interviews were over in a total of 8 minutes or so.

[00:11:17]So, it was a very hurried, cursory interview, and this court has said in that Ashok Yadav that the interview should last for about 25 to 30 minutes if you want to prescribe a reasonably high marks for the interview, etc. So, actually, my lord, this problem is occurring recurringly coming before various courts.

[00:11:40]>> How they will select >> And, my lord, if your lordship keeps saying that no, there there is a rule which prescribes minimum marks and only so many people have got minimum marks and therefore no other people got selected, my lord, we are seeing that these vacancies are piling on, continuing to skyrocket, and vacancies are not being filled. There is a problem. There is a serious problem. And that is why I want your lordship to examine this issue.

[00:12:07]>> Some of the high courts the problem in the interview. There were instances where, as we came to know on administrative side, that some candidates, say, for example, you appear in XYZ state and you belong to North India, you go to South, the South candidate qualify for where in the interviews judges helped and maybe realized that because of the language barrier, he will not be able to interact properly with the witnesses, with the local people, or with district bar association members.

[00:12:42]So, therefore, they discourage them by awarding some. But that is also not the case here. I just wanted to see that all three are from Maharashtra. Two of them are from Mumbai. One is from Satara, Sambhaji Nagar again.

[00:12:56]>> They are One of them is a lady, the applicant number two who is a lady who got the third highest marks in the written paper. And with her, even her present interview marks, she would have been selected. She would have been She Her marks would have been above, if there was no cut-off for interview, she would have been selected. She Her marks are above the marks of the lowest selected candidate whose marks were 140 from the general category. Her marks would have been 142. Even if she was given only 18 as she has been given.

[00:13:38]Is that three times the number of vacancies should be called for the interview. Here my lord only 43 candidates for 42 vacancies.

[00:13:49]In the written exam.

[00:13:53]May maybe.

[00:13:54]>> And Mr. Bhushan yes, for your information the seats don't remain vacant because all the high courts have a rule that if the candidates from direct recruit or the limited competitive examination do not fill the requisite, it will be filled up through ordinary form.

[00:14:11]>> Maybe that is true in the higher judicial service, maybe.

[00:14:15]But certainly not true in the lower judiciary. Lower judiciary we are seeing my lord I am seeing consistently state after state that a certain number of vacancies are advertised, 1/3, 1/4 are selected.

[00:14:30]>> But Mr. Bhushan that's a very big problem yes of employability. There are number of law graduates.

[00:14:39]Many people take exam. But when it comes to recruitment, we have to also have a basic minimum standard >> I agree.

[00:14:48]I agree there are lots of quacks in this profession, no doubt about it. I do not doubt for a moment my lord.

[00:14:54]>> did what my brother has pointed out. Now on judicial side, we have now mandated that examination will be every year.

[00:15:02]Every year from where are you going to get the talent? It's not that the candidate today suppose he's 35 years, 36 years, he's qualified. Understandable that after 1 year, 2 year, 3 years he's working hard and after 2 3 years he gives good performance. Problem is the annual exam. Though we keep on sometimes we also don't realize that directions are salutary because the course relying on field for you.

[00:15:25]I think after reaching to a kind of a actual saturation point, this is also mind-boggling exercise that are we able to have enough market available of the meritorious candidates >> Actually actually in the Delhi recruitment for the lower judiciary, so the situation was this that many people who were already elected for the lower judiciary in other states were disqualified by the in the Delhi judicial service exam. Some of them had topped the judicial service exams while being selected in other states.

[00:16:04]Some of them were toppers of national law schools who had been outstanding students. They had also been disqualified or failed etc. And that is why my lord the court asked that all right, let us have the papers re-examined by and this has happened three times, not once. In three cases this court has done that in every case my lord many more people have been selected thereafter.

[00:16:31]>> The written examination to do so possibility of once a while error cannot be ruled out for two reasons. Yeah. Only that either you the evaluation takes place through some software in some of the or the examiners are also not I mean it's not under the administration >> Very good. And my lord I am recently dealing I am dealing with a case of Punjab and Haryana from where your lordship is familiar which is depending before the High Court where my lord the answer sheets have been given and one can see from the answer sheets that persons who have given absolutely the correct answer to the I have seen have been given the same marks half marks as the person who has given absolutely the wrong answer.

[00:17:19]So, and this has happened not in one question, but in several questions. And one of the problems that we have also seen is that the examination papers for the higher judicial service are often being given for checking to the members of the higher judicial service of the same state. happens is that those people who are members of the higher judicial service of the same state or they have some kind of an interest sometimes in seeing that not many direct recruits get selected and that people from the lower judiciary are promoted. So, therefore >> that this going to practice can be discouraged where the judicial officers are asked to evaluate the answer sheets.

[00:18:06]For two reasons. One is that see, evaluation of answer sheet is a typical temperament. It is a different more an academic exercise. One, two, the judicial officers are so preoccupied with their day-to-day work it become difficult for them to apply >> should actually be given to some retired people.

[00:18:22]>> Either retired or you should engage always academia. And now in Chandigarh, I do not know what's happening right now what is the prevailing practice. We used to engage the services of a serving vice-chancellor of a law university requesting him to pick up his team from different law schools, not from his own law school.

[00:18:43]And that entire team will come, stay in the judicial academy. On the round table they will sit and question number five will be evaluated by one person for all.

[00:18:53]Question number six will be evaluated by one person for all. And this is how the answer sheet will keep on rolling like this.

[00:19:00]>> That would be much better, for sure. But what I'm saying is my lord, this >> Let me introduce with this one I wrote.

[00:19:06]>> This thing of >> Often Lord the minimum cut off in the interview when an interview so cursory as I'm being told that the interview hardly lasted less than 1 minute per person. So therefore this my Lord will make this whole selection process very arbitrary.

[00:19:32]That's why I'm saying my Lord that your Lordship should examine this question, re-examine this question as to whether minimum cut off should be there.

[00:19:39]>> Mr. Bhushan, now we entertain on this ground will be very difficult that 1 minute was given or not. We can at the best because the vacancies are there, we can request the High Court to sympathetically reconsider for the relaxation of rule or maybe because there are only three candidates to recall them and if the High Court so decide.

[00:20:00]>> Let them be re-examined in an interview by the any panel headed by the Chief Justice or something like that. In this case I'm told that the >> say anything which may cause aspersion on the >> All right, I agree that your Lordship should not say anything which will cast any aspersion on the members >> So the Maharashtra the unique situation is that the administrative judge of Nagpur will not know the candidates of Bombay and the senior judge will not know about the candidate in Shri Sambhaji Nagar.

[00:20:27]So that complete neutrality, impartiality that even perceived local bias is no question arising.

[00:20:36]There are small High Court, it can happen.

[00:20:38]In a small High Court where you you know in the entire bar also, one understand that this can happen. But not in a place like Bombay because the three places and Nagpur >> My Lord, these facts are really a little stark that only 43 people called for the interview, only 13 people selected.

[00:20:57]>> That is the only factor that because you when you undertake an entire exercise of exam, one should also think of what is the output I hope.

[00:21:05]>> Yeah.

[00:21:06]>> You spend public money, spend your most important to you invest a lot of time.

[00:21:11]And if ultimately outcome is very minimal, then maybe that's sometimes this what >> I understand a lot. I know that there are a lot of lawyers who are not competent to certainly be appointed to the higher judiciary. That is true. That is a fact. But it is also not true that you cannot even find 42 people in the entire Maharashtra to be appointed in the higher judicial service. That is also not correct that they can only find 13 people when so many people more than 2,500 people have taken the exam.

[00:21:48]>> We are two petitioners before us. We are two petitioners in this special petition are practicing advocates in Mumbai and Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar. They appeared in the selection process of 2024 for recruitment to the post of district judges, namely the Maharashtra higher judicial services.

[00:22:12]Selection process was comprising two parts, namely the written examination and viva voce.

[00:22:17]Petitioners have apparently performed very well in the written examination and one of them is taking the third position in the exam in this said examination.

[00:22:28]There were in all 40 vacancies.

[00:22:31]Initially 28 vacant posts were advertised, but subsequently more vacancies became available, which were added through two addendums and consequently it was decided to fill up 42 vacant posts. The petitioners were called for viva voce. However, as they failed to secure minimum 20% marks prescribed in the for the viva voce prescribed as the qualifying >> Less than 40%. They received 40% was the cut off for the interview. They received less than 40%.

[00:23:02]>> Less than 40%. They scored less than 40%. Which I guess that is 20 marks.

[00:23:07]In the verbal voce, as a result of which their names were not included in the final selections. The High Court was able to select only 13 candidates against 42 vacancies. They approached the High Court. However, their petition has been dismissed from our giving rise to these proceedings. And so, we have heard the South portion of counsel for the petitioners.

[00:23:27]And we are going to treat it as a whole.

[00:23:28]So, various issues Various issues like prescription of minimum marks for verbal voce and or a uniformity in prescription of such marks on family basis have been raised during the course of arguments. However, we are of the view that such issues can be independently examined by this court in the in the proceedings.

[00:23:50]The The proceedings which are pending before us with respect to the judicial services. As regards to the petitioners, comma, it is evident that they could not be selected only because of their failure to qualify the minimum marks in verbal voce. Since last year the vacancies have remained unfilled, comma, it seems to us that last year the vacancies have remained unfilled and two out of two petitioners are women candidates. Who are women, I think.

[00:24:17]>> Two are women, yes.

[00:24:18]>> Two are women.

[00:24:19]Women candidates, comma.

[00:24:21]It seems to us that >> One of them was the assistant public prosecutor and she is SC, scheduled caste.

[00:24:27]>> It seems to us that one of them being scheduled caste also, comma, it seems to us that the petitioners' claim and that the petitioners' candidatures can be seen hypothetically considered by the High Court. It should be considered that comma, if the High Court is satisfied, comma, the requirement of minimum marks in the verbal voce can be relaxed by invoking appropriate powers under the statutory provisions and or any other transparent mechanism or any other mechanism can be worked by the High Court or certain circumstances. We have already put in our discussion of the record and just to to adjust the overall suitability of the all that we have observed is that that keeping in view in fact that substantial part of the [music] differences in the outcome from our claim of the future sympathetic to the commission. [music] The resolution of the dispute is that I see >> I'm taking your life in my hands.

[00:25:26]>> Right.

[00:25:26]>> Those two words to sticky dilemma name Nayak Bhakti per both the bun Yadis Supreme Court some love the wall cedar Cassie 15 to 20 minutes interview Cassie home in the market Sallu curry minute who is key you get that college car Kelly kit chocolate Kumar number bar Karina this Nayak mustard Nayak money Nayak police system Sammy chocolate Jada or animal do is but quality skin TV is for Muslim but I have care care interview menu to passing marks the market money I'm making Kim TV I need to comments box the rule Sadaqah then you are those two