Case Summary
| Citation | |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | |
| Issues | |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | |
| Judgement | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
Sometime in October 1980, the Haryana Public Service Commission invited applications
for recruitment to 61 posts in Haryana Civil Service (Executive) and other Allied Services.
The procedure for recruitment was governed by the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch)
Rules, 1930 as applicable in the State of Haryana. Rule 9 clause (1) of these Rules provided
that a competitive examination shall be held at any place in Haryana each year in or around
the month of January for the purpose of selection by competition of as many candidates for
the Haryana Civil Service (Executive) and other Allied Services as the Governor of Haryana
may determine and such competitive examination shall be held in accordance with the
Regulations contained in Appendix I to the Rules. Rule 10 laid down the conditions for
eligibility to appear at the competitive examination. Regulation I in Appendix I provided that
the competitive examination shall include compulsory and optional subjects and every
candidate shall take all the compulsory subjects and not more than three of the optional
subjects, provided that ex-servicemen shall not be required to appear in the optional subjects.
The compulsory subjects included English Essay, Hindi, Hindi Essay and General Knowledge
carrying the aggregate of 400 marks and there was also viva voce examination which was
compulsory and which carried 200 marks and each optional subject carried 100 marks. The
result was that the written examination carried an aggregate of 700 marks for candidates in
general and for ex-servicemen, it carried an aggregate of 400 marks while in case of both, the
viva voce examination carried 200 marks. Regulation 3 read as follows:
“3. No candidate shall be eligible to appear in the viva voce test unless he
obtains 45% marks in the aggregate of all subjects including at least 33% marks in
each of the language papers in Hindi (in Devnagri Script) and Hindi Essay provided
that if at any examination a sufficient number of candidates do not obtain 45% marks
in the aggregate, the Commission may at their discretion lower this percentage to not
below than 40% for the language papers remaining unchanged.”
In response to the advertisement issued by the Haryana Public Service Commission,
about 6000 candidates applied for recruitment and appeared for the written examination held
by the Haryana Public Service Commission. Out of 6000 candidates who appeared for the
written examination, over 1300 obtained more than 45% marks and thus qualified for being
called for the viva voce examination. The Haryana Public Service Commission invited all the
1300 and more candidates who qualified for the viva voce test, for interview and the
interviews lasted for almost half a year. It seems that though originally applications were
invited for recruitment to 61 posts, the number of vacancies rose during the time taken up in
the written examination and the viva voce test and ultimately 119 posts became available for
being filled and on the basis of total marks obtained in the written examination as well as viva
voce test, 119 candidates were selected and recommended by the Haryana Public Service
Commission to the State Government. There were some candidates who had obtained very
high marks at the written examination but owing to rather poor marks obtained by them in the
viva voce test, they could not come within the first 119 candidates and they were
172
consequently not selected. They were aggrieved by the selections made by the Commission
and three out of them filed Civil Writ 2495 of 1983 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana
challenging the validity of the selections and seeking a writ for quashing and setting aside the
same. They also claimed that the marks given in the viva voce test should be ignored and
selections should be made only on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in the
written examination and they contended that if this was done, they would have been within
first 119 to be selected by the Haryana Public Service Commission. Some other candidates
who did not figure in the list of 119 selected candidates also filed Civil Writ Petitions
challenging the validity of the selections on substantially the same grounds and claiming
substantially the same relief as the petitioners in Civil Writ Petition 2495 of 1983. The State
of Haryana was joined as Respondent 1, the Haryana Public Service Commission as
Respondent 2 and three out of the five members of the Haryana Public Service Commission,
as Respondents 3 to 5 in the writ petitions. The Chairman and one other member of the
Haryana Public Service Commission, namely, Shri B.S. Lather and Shri Gurmesh Prakash
Bishnoi were however not impleaded as respondents in the writ petitions. None of the 119
selected candidates were joined as respondents.
P.N. BHAGWATI, J. – 4. There were several grounds on which the validity of the selections
made by the Haryana Public Service Commission was assailed on behalf of the petitioners
and a declaration was sought that they were entitled to be selected as falling within the first
119 candidates. It was urged on behalf of the petitioners that two of the selected candidates,
namely Mrs. Shakuntala Rani and Balbir Singh were related to one of the members of the
Haryana Public Service Commission namely, Sh. R.C. Marya, while the third selected
candidate namely Trilok Nath Sharma was related to another member namely, Sh. Raghubar
Dayal Gaur and though these two members did not participate in the interview of their
respective relatives they did participate in the interview of other candidates and the tactics
adopted by the Chairman and the members of the Commission was to give high marks to the
relatives and award low marks to the other candidates so as to ensure the selection of their
relatives. This, according to petitioners, vitiated the entire selection process.
- It was also urged on behalf of the respondents that the Haryana Public Service
Commission being a constitutional authority, it was not necessary for Sh. R.C. Marya and Sh.
Raghubar Dayal Gaur to withdraw altogether from the interviews and they acted correctly in
abstaining from participation when their relatives came to be interviewed. This was according
to the respondents, in conformity with the principles of fair play and did not affect the validity
of the selections. - This takes us to the next ground of attack which found favour with the Division
Bench of the High Court, namely that the participation of Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar
Dayal Gaur in the process of selection introduced a serious infirmity in the selections. It was
not disputed and indeed on the record it could not be, that when the close relatives of Shri
R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur came up for interview (sic), but, according to the
Division Bench of the High Court, such limited withdrawal from participation was not
enough and both the members, said the Division Bench, ought to have withdrawn from the
selection process altogether. The Division Bench of the High Court relied heavily on the fact
173
that Trilok Nath Sharma, who was the son-in-law of the sister of Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur
obtained 160 marks out of 200 in the viva voce test while Shakuntala Rani daughter-in-law of
Shri R.C. Marya obtained 131 marks and Balbir Singh brother of the son-in-law of Shri R.C.
Marya obtained 130 marks and observed that “these admitted facts are obviously tell-tale”.
The Division Bench went to the length of imputing nepotism and favouritism to the Chairman
and members of the Haryana Public Service Commission by observing that each member of
the Haryana Public Service Commission adjusted the relatives of the others and awarded low
marks in the interview to the other candidates with a view to ousting the latter and bolstering
up the former in the merit list. We are pained to observe that such a serious aspersion should
have been cast on the Chairman and members of the Haryana Public Service Commission
without any basis or justification. Merely because Trilok Nath Sharma obtained 160 marks,
Shakuntala Rani obtained 131 marks and Balbir Singh obtained 130 marks, no inference can
necessarily be drawn that these high marks were given to them in viva voce examination
undeservedly with a view to favouring them at the cost of more meritorious candidates. There
is nothing to show that these three candidates who happened to be related to Shri Raghubar
Daya1 Gaur and Shri R.C. Marya were not possessed of any requisite calibre or competence
or their performance at the viva voce examination did not justify the marks awarded to them.
The only circumstance on which the Division Bench relied for raising the inference that such
high marks were given to these three candidates, not on merit, but as an act of nepotism with
a view to unduly favouring them so that they can come within the range of selection, was that
out of these three candidates, two were related to Shri R.C. Marya and one was related to Shri
Raghubar Dayal Gaur. This inference, we are constrained to observe, was wholly unjustified.
We cannot help remarking that the Division Bench indulged in surmises and conjectures in
reaching the conclusion that high marks were given unjustifiably to these three candidates at
the viva voce examination with a view to pushing them up and low marks were deliberately
given to other more meritorious candidates with a view to pushing them down and thus
facilitating the selection of these three candidates who would not otherwise have come within
the range of selection.
We fail to appreciate as to what is the basis on which the Division Bench could observe
that these three candidates got high marks at the viva voce examination only because they
were related to Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur. Can a relative of a member
of a Public Service Commission, Central or State, not get high marks at the viva voce
examination on his own merit? Must he always get low marks, so that if high marks are
awarded to him, that would necessarily be attributed to his relationship with the member of
the Public Service Commission? - The Division Bench sought to draw support for its inference from an article written by
Shri D.R. Chaudhary, a member of the Haryana Public Service Commission, who is arrayed
as Respondent 3 in the writ petition. This article was captioned “Public Service Commissions
under Pressures” and was written by Shri D.R. Chaudhary and published in the issue of
Tribune dated March 13, 1981. Shri D.R. Chaudhary was appointed a member of the Haryana
Public Service Commission on December 2, 1977. He had been such member for over three
years at the time of writing this article.
174 - He pointed out in this article, and we are quoting here a passage which has been
strongly relied upon by the Division Bench:
“With political morality in our system at its lowest ebb, the politicians are always
in a hurry to pack the P.S.Cs. with such persons who would be pliable tools in the
matter of recruitment. Academic worth, intellectual calibre, experience of men and
matters, and integrity are of no relevance. What is important is a person’s
‘dependability’.
Narrow caste, communal and regional issues dominate Indian politics today and
these considerations override questions of talent in the matter of recruitment. In the
process a member with little intellectual calibre and less integrity begins to serve his
own interests and those of his political benefactor. No wonder there is a widespread
feeling in the States (mercifully, with the U.P.S.C. as a possible exception) that every
post carries a price tag.
We have reached a state when the composition and functioning of our P.S.Cs.
should be critically evaluated. This is necessary if the institution has to survive as a
meaningful body. Its functioning should be brought under public gaze. At present
there is a halo of secrecy surrounding the P.S.C. and secrecy always breeds
corruption. It would be suicidal to treat the P.S.C. as a sacred cow. There is nothing
more sacred than the public interest and the public interest demands that the
functioning of the P.S.Cs. should be widely debated through the press and other
forums I invite my colleagues of the P.S.Cs. and public spirited individuals to join
the debate.”
We may reasonably assume that a person who wrote such an article would never be a
party to any manipulation in the selection of candidates nor would he debase or demean
himself by indulging in or even lending his support to, any acts of nepotism or favouritism. It
would be quite legitimate to infer that if there had been any attempt to manipulate the marks
at the viva voce examination with a view to favouring the undeserving or pushing down the
meritorious, Shri D.R. Chaudhary would have protested against such improper and unholy
attempt. The very fact that Shri D.R. Chaudhary not only did not register any dissent in regard
to the marks awarded at the viva voce examination but actually agreed with the evaluation
made by his colleagues shows that there was nothing wrong with the marking nor there was
any manipulation of marks indicating nepotism or favouritism. In fact Shri D.R. Chaudhary
filed an affidavit in these proceedings where he candidly said that this article written by him
was based on his direct experience of working in the Haryana Public Service Commission and
he proceeded to add boldly and courageously:
“As a member of H.P.S.C., I noticed various forces trying to undermine the
independent functioning of the Commission. What irked me the most was the
political interference. An attempt was made to convert this august body into a petty
government department where politicians’ writ could run large. Besides this, caste
lobbies and money-bags were active to influence its decisions at every stage.
I was in a state of agony. I decided to take the matter to the public through the
medium of the press. I knew that I would incur the wrath of the powers and dismay
caste lobbies and money-bags.
175
I took a calculated risk and wrote the article under question. It did infuriate the
political bosses as is evident from a news item published in the Tribune dated June
25, 1981 (clipping attached). But at the same time it served the purpose I had in
mind. It started a public debate. It created a furor. It was read and debated widely. A
number of letters to the Editor appeared in the Tribune. It also figured in the session
of the Haryana Vidhan Sabha.
The article had a desired effect. Pressures ceased. Political operators and other
manipulators were put on the alert. As such I did not feel the necessity of writing
again on the same issue though I continued writing on other matters.”
Then speaking specifically about the viva voce examination held by the Haryana Public
Service Commission in the present case, Shri D.R. Chaudhary stated:
“The interviews for the recruitment of H.C.S. and Allied Services, which is the
subject of writ petitions in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, were
conducted about two years after the publication of the article. No pressure, political
or otherwise, was exercised on me, nor to the best of my knowledge, on any other
colleague of mine in the Commission during the course of this recruitment.” - There is no reason as to why this statement made by Shri D.R. Chaudhary should not
be believed. It is indeed surprising that the Division Bench accepted readily what was said by
Shri D.R. Chaudhary in the article written by him on March 13, 1981 but for some
inexplicable reason, refused to believe the same Shri D.R. Chaudhary when he stated that this
article had the desired effect and on account of the exposure made in this article, pressures,
political or otherwise, ceased so far as the functioning of the Haryana Public Service
Commission was concerned and in the awarding of marks at the viva voce examination, no
pressure, political or otherwise, was exercised on Shri D.R. Chaudhary nor to the best of his
knowledge, on any of his other colleagues. We accept what has been stated by Shri D.R.
Chaudhary in his affidavit and disapprove the observation made by the Division Bench that
high marks were undeservedly given to the three candidates related to Shri R.C. Marya and
Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur and low marks were deliberately given to the other meritorious
candidates with a view to manipulating the selection of the former at the cost of the latter. We
are of the view that there was no material whatsoever on record to justify such observation on
the part of the Division Bench. In fact, far from there being any material supportive of such
observation, we find that there is one circumstance, which, in our opinion, completely
militates against the view taken by the Division Bench and that circumstance is that the marks
obtained by the candidates at the written examination were not disclosed to the members of
the Haryana Public Service Commission who held the viva voce examination. If the members,
who interviewed the candidates, did not know what were the marks obtained by the
candidates at the written examination, it is difficult to see how they could have manipulated
the marks at the viva voce examination with a view to pushing up the three candidates related
to Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur or any other candidates of their choice so
as to bring them within the range of selection. - But the question still remains whether the selections made by the Haryana Public
Service Commission could be said to be vitiated on account of the fact that Shri R.C. Marya
and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur participated in the selection process, though Trilok Nath
176
Sharma who was related to Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur and Shakuntala Rani and Balbir Singh
both of whom were related to Shri R.C. Marya, were candidates for selection. It is
undoubtedly true that Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur did not participate when Trilok Nath Sharma
came up for interview and similarly Shri R.C. Marya did not participate when Shakuntala
Rani and Balbir Singh appeared for interview at the viva voce examination. But, according to
the petitioners, this was not sufficient to wipe out the blemish in the process of selection for
two reasons: firstly, because Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur participated in
the interviews of the other candidates and that gave rise to a reasonable apprehension in the
mind of the candidates that Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur might tend to
depress the marks of the other candidates with a view to ensuring the selection of the
candidates related to them and secondly, because there could be reasonable apprehension in
the mind of the candidates that the other members of the Haryana Public Service Commission
interviewing the candidates might, out of regard for their colleagues, tend to give higher
marks to the candidates related to them. The argument of the petitioners was that the presence
of Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur on the interviewing committee gave rise to
an impression that there was reasonable likelihood of bias in favour of the three candidates
related to Shri R.C. Marya and Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur and this had the effect of vitiating
the entire selection process. - We agree with the petitioners that it is one of the fundamental principles of our
jurisprudence that no man can be a judge in his own cause and that if there is a reasonable
likelihood of bias it is “in accordance with natural justice and common sense that the justice
likely to be so biased should be incapacitated from sitting”. The question is not whether the
judge is actually biased or in fact decides partially, but whether there is a real likelihood of
bias. What is objectionable in such a case is not that the decision is actually tainted with bias
but that the circumstances are such as to create a reasonable apprehension in the mind of
others that there is a likelihood of bias affecting the decision. The basic principle underlying
this rule is that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done and this rule has
received wide recognition in several decisions of this Court. It is also important to note that
this rule is not confined to cases where judicial power strict sense is exercised. It is
appropriately extended to all cases where an independent mind has to be applied to arrive at a
fair and just decision between the rival claims of parties. Justice is not the function of the
courts alone; it is also the duty of all those who are expected to decide fairly between
contending parties. The strict standards applied to authorities exercising judicial power are
being increasingly applied to administrative bodies, for it is vital to the maintenance of the
rule of law in a Welfare State where the jurisdiction of administrative bodies is increasing at a
rapid pace that the instrumentalities of the State should discharge their functions in a fair and
just manner. This was the basis on which the applicability of this rule was extended to the
decision-making process of a selection committee constituted for selecting officers to the
Indian Forest Service in A.K. Kraipak. This Court emphasized that it was not necessary to
establish bias but it was sufficient to invalidate the selection process if it could be shown that
there was reasonable likelihood of bias. The likelihood of bias may arise on account of
proprietary interest or on account of personal reasons, such as, hostility to one party or
personal friendship or family relationship with the other. Where reasonable likelihood of bias
is alleged on the ground of relationship, the question would always be as to how close be the
177
degree of relationship or in other words, is the nearness of relationship so great as to give rise
to reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the authority making the selection. - We must straightaway point out that A.K. Kaipak case is a landmark in the
development of administrative law and it has contributed in a large measure to the
strengthening of the rule of law in this country. We would not like to whittle down in the
slightest measure the vital principle laid down in this decision which has nourished the roots
of the rule of law and injected justice and fair play into legality. There can be no doubt that if
a Selection Committee is constituted for the purpose of selecting candidates on merits and one
of the members of the Selection Committee is closely related to a candidate appearing for the
selection, it would not be enough for such member merely to withdraw from participation in
the interview of the candidate related to him but he must withdraw altogether from the entire
selection process and ask the authorities to nominate another person in his place on the
Selection Committee, because otherwise all the selections made would be vitiated on account
of reasonable likelihood of bias affecting the process of selection. But the situation here is a
little different because the selection of candidates to the Haryana Civil Service (Executive)
and Allied Services is being made not by any Selection Committee constituted for that
purpose but it is being done by the Haryana Public Service Commission which is a
Commission set up under Article 316 of the Constitution. It is a Commission which consists
of a Chairman and a specified number of members and is a constitutional authority. We do
not think that the principle which requires that a member of a Selection Committee whose
close relative is appearing for selection should decline to become a member of the Selection
Committee or withdraw from it leaving it to the appointing authority to nominate another
person in his place, need be applied in case of a constitutional authority like the Public
Service Commission, whether Central or State. If a member of a Public Service Commission
were to withdraw altogether from the selection process on the ground that a close relative of
his is appearing for selection, no other person save a member can be substituted in his place.
And it may sometimes happen that no other member is available to take the place of such
member and the functioning of the Public Service Commission may be affected. When two or
more members of a Public Service Commission are holding a viva voce examination, they are
functioning not as individuals but as the Public Service Commission. Of course, we must
make it clear that when a close relative of a member of a Public Service Commission is
appearing for interview, such member must withdraw from participation in the interview of
that candidate and must not take part in any discussion in regard to the merits of that
candidate and even the marks or credits given to that candidate should not be disclosed to
him. Here in the present case it was common ground between the parties that Shri Raghubar
Dayal Gaur did not participate at all in interviewing Trilok Nath Sharma and likewise Shri
R.C. Marya did not participate at all when Shakuntala Rani and Balbir Singh came to be
interviewed and in fact, both of them retired from the room when the interviews of their
respective relatives were held. Moreover, neither of them took any part in any discussion with
regard to the merits of his relatives nor is there anything to show that the marks or credits
obtained by their respective relatives at the interviews were disclosed to them. We are
therefore of the view that there was no infirmity attaching to the selections made by the
Haryana Public Service Commission on the ground that, though their close relatives were
appearing for the interview, Shri Raghubar Dayal Gaur and Shri R.C. Marya did not withdraw
178
completely from the entire selection process. This ground urged on behalf of the petitioners
must therefore be rejected. - There was also one other contention which found favour with the Division Bench in
support of its conclusion that there was reasonable likelihood of bias vitiating the “whole
gamut of the selection process”. This contention was based on the fact that though only 61
vacant posts were advertised for being filled up, over 1300 candidates representing more than
20 times the number of available vacancies, were called for the viva voce examination. The
Division Bench pointed out that in order to have a proper balance between the objective
assessment of a written examination and the subjective assessment of personality by a viva
voce test, the candidates to be called for interview at the viva voce test should not exceed
twice or at the highest, thrice the number of available vacancies. This practice of confining
the number of candidates to be called for interview to twice or at the highest, thrice the
number of vacancies to be filled up, was being followed consistently by the Union Public
Service Commission in case of Civil Services Examination, but in the present case, as
observed by the Division Bench, a departure was made by the Haryana Public Service
Commission and candidates numbering more than 20 times the available vacancies were
called for’ interview. The result, according to the Division Bench, was that the area of
arbitrariness in the viva voce test was considerably enlarged and even a student who had got
poor marks in the written examination and who having regard to dismal performance at the
written examination did not deserve to be called for interview, could get a chance of being
called and he could then be pulled up within the range of selection by awarding unduly high
marks at the viva voce examination. This conclusion was sought to be buttressed by the
Division Bench by relying on a comparison of the marks obtained by some of the petitioners
in the written examination and at the viva voce test. This comparison showed that eight of the
petitioners secured “a percentage of around 60% rising up to a highest of 68.5%” in the
written examination, but they were awarded “a disastrously low percentage of marks in the
viva voce ranging from the rock bottom of 13% to 21%”, making it impossible for them to
bridge the difference so as to be able to come within the range of selection. How could such
brilliant candidates who had done so well in the written examination fare so poorly in the viva
voce test that they could not get more than 20% marks, asked the Division Bench? The
Division Bench also pointed out that some out of these eight petitioners had appeared in an
earlier examination held in 1977-78 and at the viva voce test held at that time, they had
secured more than 50 to 55% marks and it was difficult to believe that during the next three
succeeding years, they had deteriorated to such an extent that they slumped down to 20%
marks. The Division Bench also analysed the comparative marks obtained by the first 16
candidates who topped the list in the written examination and noted that on account of the
poor marks obtained by them at the viva voce test, 10 out of these 16 candidates were
“knocked out of the race” because their ranking, on the basis of the total marks obtained by
them in the written examination and the viva voce test, went far below 61 and only 4 out of
the remaining 6 could rank within the first 16 so as to be eligible for appointment in the
Haryana Civil Service (Executive Branch) which is a superior service compared to other
allied services. It was also pointed out by the Division Bench that out of 16 candidates who
topped the list on the basis of combined marks obtained in the written and viva voce
examinations and who consequently secured appointment to posts in the Haryana Civil
179
Service (Executive Branch), 12 could make it only on account of the high marks obtained by
them at the viva voce examination, though they were not high up in ranking in the written
examination. On the basis of these facts and circumstances, the Division Bench concluded
that the petitioners had discharged the burden of showing that there was reasonable likelihood
of bias vitiating the entire selection process. - We do not think we can agree with this conclusion reached by the Division Bench.
But whilst disagreeing with the conclusion, we must admit that the Haryana Public Service
Commission was not right in calling for interview all the 1300 and odd candidates who
secured 45% or more marks in the written examination. The respondents sought to justify the
action of the Haryana Public Service Commission by relying on Regulation 3 of the
Regulations contained in Appendix 1 of the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules,
1930 which were applicable in the State of Haryana and contended that on a true
interpretation of that Regulation, the Haryana Public Service Commission was bound to call
for interview all the candidates who secured a minimum of 45% marks in the aggregate at the
written examination. We do not think this contention is well founded. A plain reading of
Regulation 3 will show that it is wholly unjustified. We have already referred to Regulation 3
in an earlier part of the judgment and we need not reproduce it again. It is clear on a plain
natural construction of Regulation 3 that what it prescribes is merely a minimum qualification
for eligibility to appear at the viva voce test. Every candidate to be eligible for appearing at
the viva voce test must obtain at least 45% marks in the aggregate in the written examination.
But obtaining of minimum 45% marks does not by itself entitles a candidate to insist that he
should be called for the viva voce test. There is no obligation on the Haryana Public Service
Commission to call for the viva voce test all the candidates who satisfy the minimum
eligibility requirement. It is open to the Haryana Public Service Commission to say that out of
the candidates who satisfy the eligibility criterion of minimum 45% marks in the written
examination, only a limited number of candidates at the top of the list shall be called for
interview. And this has necessarily to be done because otherwise the viva voce test would be
reduced to a farce. It is indeed difficult to see how a viva voce test for properly and
satisfactorily measuring the personality of a candidate can be carried out, if over 1300
candidates are to be interviewed for recruitment to a service. If a viva voce test is to be carried
out in a thorough and scientific manner, as it must be in order to arrive at a fair and
satisfactory evaluation of the personality of a candidate, the interview must take anything
between 10 to 30 minutes. In fact, Herman Finer in his book on Theory and Practice of
Modern Government points out that “the interview should last at least half an hour”. The
Union Public Service Commission making selections for the Indian Administrative Service
also interviews a candidate for almost half an hour. Only 11 to 12 candidates are called for
interview in a day of 5½ hours. It is obvious that in the circumstances, it would be impossible
to carry out a satisfactory viva voce test if such a large unmanageable number of over 1300
candidates are to be interviewed. The interviews would then tend to be casual, superficial and
sloppy and the assessment made at such interviews would not correctly reflect the true
measure of the personality of the candidate. Moreover, such a course would widen the area of
arbitrariness, for even a candidate who is very much lower down in the list on the basis of
marks obtained in the written examination, can, borrow an expression used by the Division
Bench, ‘gatecrash’ into the range of selection, if he is awarded unduly high marks at the viva
180
voce examination. It has therefore always been the practice of the Union Public Service
Commission to call for interview, candidates representing not more than twice or thrice the
number of available vacancies. Kothari Committee’s Report on the “Recruitment Policy and
Selection Methods for the Civil Services Examination” also points out, after an in-depth
examination of the question as to what should be the number of candidates to be called for
interview:
“The number of candidates to be called for interview, in order of the total marks
in written papers, should not exceed, we think, twice the number of vacancies to be
filled….”
Otherwise the written examination which is definitely more objective in its assessment
than the viva voce test will lose all meaning and credibility and the viva voce test which is to
some extent subjective and discretionary in its evaluation will become the decisive factor in
the process of selection. We are therefore of the view that where there is a composite test
consisting of a written examination followed by a viva voce test, the number of candidates to
be called for interview in order of the marks obtained in the written examination, should not
exceed twice or at the highest, thrice the number of vacancies to be filled. The Haryana Public
Service Commission in the present case called for interview all candidates numbering over
1300 who satisfied the minimum eligibility requirement by securing a minimum of 45%
marks in the written examination and this was certainly not right, but we may point out that in
doing so, the Haryana Public Service Commission could not be said to be actuated by any
mala fide or oblique motive, because it was common ground between the parties that this was
the practice which was being consistently followed by the Haryana Public Service
Commission over the years and what was done in this case was nothing exceptional. The only
question is whether this had any invalidating effect on the selections made by the Haryana
Public Service Commission. - We do not think that the selections made by the Haryana Public Service Commission
could be said to be vitiated merely on the ground that as many as 1300 and more candidates
representing more than 20 times the number of available vacancies were called for interview,
though on the view taken by us that was not the right course to follow and not more than
twice or at the highest thrice, the number of candidates should have been called for interview.
Something more than merely calling an unduly large number of candidates for interview must
be shown in order to invalidate the selections made. That is why the Division Bench relied on
the comparative figures of marks obtained in the written examination and at the viva voce test
by the petitioners, the first 16 candidates who topped the list in the written examination and
the first 16 candidates who topped the list on the basis of the combined marks obtained in the
written examination and the viva voce test, and observed that these figures showed that there
was reasonable likelihood of arbitrariness and bias having operated in the marking at the viva
voce test. Now it is true that some of the petitioners did quite well in the written examination
but fared badly in the viva voce test and in fact their performance at the viva voce test
appeared to have deteriorated in comparison to their performance in the year 1977-78.
Equally it is true that out of the first 16 candidates who topped the list in the written
examination, 10 secured poor rating in the viva voce test and were knocked out of the
reckoning while 2 also got low marks in the viva voce test but just managed to scrape through
181
to come within the range of selection. It is also true that out of the first 16 candidates who
topped the list on the basis of the combined marks obtained in the written examination and the
viva voce test, 12 could come in the list only on account of high marks obtained by them at
the viva voce test, though the marks obtained by them in the written examination were not of
sufficiently high order. These figures relied upon by the Division Bench may create a
suspicion in one’s mind that some element of arbitrariness might have entered the assessment
in the viva voce examination. But suspicion cannot take the place of proof and we cannot
strike down the selections made on the ground that the evaluation of the merits of the
candidates in the viva voce examination might be arbitrary. It is necessary to point out that the
Court cannot sit in judgment over the marks awarded by interviewing bodies unless it is
proved or obvious that the marking is plainly and indubitably arbitrary or affected by oblique
motives. It is only if the assessment is patently arbitrary or the risk of arbitrariness is so high
that a reasonable person would regard arbitrariness as inevitable, that the assessment of marks
at the viva voce test may be regarded as suffering from the vice of arbitrariness. Moreover,
apart from only three candidates, namely, Trilok Nath Sharma, Shakuntala Rani and Balbir
Singh one of whom belonged to the general category and was related to Shri Raghubar Dayal
Gaur and the other two were candidates for the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and were
related to Shri R.C. Marya, there was no other candidate in whom the Chairman or any
member of the Haryana Public Service Commission was interested, so that there could be any
motive for manipulation of the marks at the viva voce examination. There were of course
general allegations of casteism made against the Chairman and the members of the Haryana
Public Service Commission, but these allegations were not substantiated by producing any
reliable material before the Court. The Chairman and members of the Haryana Public Service
Commission in fact belonged to different castes and it was not as if any particular caste was
predominant amongst the Chairman and members of the Haryana Public Service Commission
so as even to remotely justify an inference that the marks might have been manipulated to
favour the candidates of that caste. We do not think that the Division Bench was right in
striking down the selections made by the Haryana Public Service Commission on the ground
that they were vitiated by arbitrariness or by reasonable likelihood of bias. - That takes us to the next ground of challenge which found acceptance with the
Division Bench. The contention of the petitioners under this ground of challenge was that in
comparison to the marks allocated to the written examination, the proportion of the marks
allocated to the viva voce test was excessively high and that introduced an irredeemable
element of arbitrariness in the selection process so as to offend Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. It is necessary in order to appreciate this contention and to adjudicate upon its
validity to consider the relative weight attached by the relevant rules to the written
examination and the viva voce test. We have already referred to the Punjab Civil Service
(Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 as applicable in the State of Haryana. Rule 9 of these rules
prescribes that a competitive examination shall be held in accordance with the Regulations set
out in Appendix 1 for the purpose of selection by competition of candidates to the Haryana
Civil Service (Executive Branch) and other Allied Services and under Regulations 1 and 5
every ex-service officer has to appear in a written examination in 5 compulsory subjects
carrying the aggregate of 400 marks and a viva voce test carrying 200 marks and likewise,
every candidate belonging to the general category has to appear in a written examination in 8
182
subjects carrying the aggregate of 700 marks and for him also there is a viva voce test
carrying 200 marks. The argument of the petitioners was that in case of ex-service officers the
marks allocated for the viva voce test were 200 as against 400 allocated for the written
examination so that the marks allocated for the viva voce test came to 33.3% of the total
number of marks taken into account for the purpose of making selection. So also in the case
of candidates belonging to the general category, the marks allocated for the viva voce test
were 200 as against 700 allocated for the written examination with the result that the marks
allocated for the viva voce test came to 22.2% of the total number of marks for the
competitive examination. This percentage of 33.3% in the case of ex-service officers and
22.2% in the case of other candidates was, according to the Division Bench, unduly high and
rendered the selection of the candidates arbitrary. The correctness of this view has been
challenged before us on behalf of the respondents. - It is now admitted on all hands that while a written examination assesses the
candidate’s knowledge and intellectual ability, a viva voce test seeks to assess a candidate’s
overall intellectual and personal qualities. While a written examination has certain distinct
advantages over the viva voce test, there are yet no written tests which can evaluate a
candidate’s initiative, alertness, resourcefulness, dependableness, cooperativeness, capacity
for clear and logical presentation, effectiveness in discussion, effectiveness in meeting and
dealing with others, adaptability, judgment, ability to make decision, ability to lead,
intellectual and moral integrity. Some of these qualities can be evaluated, perhaps with some
degree of error, by viva voce test, much depending on the constitution of the interview board. - We may now, in the background of this discussion, proceed to consider whether the
allocation of as high a percentage of marks as 33.3% in case of ex-service officers and 22.2%
in case of other candidates, for the viva voce test renders the selection process arbitrary. So
far as ex-service officers are concerned, there can be no doubt that the percentage of marks
allocated for the viva voce test in their case is unduly high and it does suffer from the vice of
arbitrariness. It has been pointed out by the Division Bench in a fairly elaborate discussion
that so far as the present selections in the category of ex-service officers are concerned, the
spread of marks in the viva voce test was inordinately high compared to the spread of marks
in the written examination. The minimum marks required to be obtained in the written
examination for eligibility for the viva voce test are 180 and as against these minimum 180
marks, the highest marks obtained in the written examination in the category of ex-service
officers were 270, the spread of marks in the written examination thus being only 90 marks
which works out to a ratio of 22.2%. But when we turn to the marks obtained in the viva voce
test, we find that in case of ex-service officers the lowest marks obtained were 20 while the
highest marks secured were 171 and the spread of marks in the viva voce test was thus as
wide as 151 in a total of 200 marks, which worked out to an inordinately high percentage of - The spread of marks in the viva voce test being enormously large compared to the spread
of marks in the written examination, the viva voce test tended to become a determining factor
in the selection process, because even if a candidate secured the highest marks in the written
examination, he could be easily knocked out of the race by awarding him the lowest marks in
the viva voce test and correspondingly, a candidate who obtained the lowest marks in the
written examination could be raised to the top most position in the merit list by an
183
inordinately high marking in the viva voce test. It is therefore obvious that the allocation of
such a high percentage of marks as 33.3% opens the door wide for arbitrariness and in order
to diminish, if not eliminate, the risk of arbitrariness, the percentage needs to be reduced. But
while considering what percentage of marks may legitimately be allocated for the viva voce
test without incurring the reproach of arbitrariness, it must be remembered that ex-service
officers would ordinarily be middle-aged persons of mature personality and it would be hard
on them at that age to go through a long written examination involving 8 subjects and hence it
would not be unfair to require them to go through a shorter written examination in only 5
subjects and submit to a viva voce test carrying a higher percentage of marks than what might
be prescribed in case of younger candidates. The personalities of these ex-service officers
being fully mature and developed, it would not be difficult to arrive at a fair assessment of
their merits on the basis of searching and incisive viva voce test and therefore in their case,
the viva voce test may be accorded relatively greater weight. But in any event the marks
allocated for the viva voce test cannot be as high as 33.3%. - The position is no different when we examine the question in regard to the percentage
of marks allocated for the viva voce test in case of persons belonging to the general category.
The percentage in the case of these candidates is less than that in the case of ex-service
officers, but even so it is quite high at the figure of 22.2%. Here also it has been pointed out
by the Division Bench by giving facts and figures as to how in the case of present selections
from the general category the spread of marks in the viva voce test was inordinately high
compared to the spread of marks in the written examination so that a candidate receiving low
marks in the written examination could be pulled up to a high position in the merit list by
inordinately high marking in the viva voce test. The viva voce test in the general category,
too, would consequently tend to become a determining factor in the process of selection,
tilting the scales in favour of one candidate or the other according to the marks awarded to
him in the viva voce test. This is amply borne out by the observations of the Kothari
Committee in the Report made by it in regard to the selections to the Indian Administrative
Service and other Allied Services. The competitive examination in the Indian Administrative
Service and other Allied Services also consists of a written examination followed by a viva
voce test. Earlier in 1948 the percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test was 22 and
it was marginally brought down to 21.60 in 1951 and then again in 1964, it was scaled down
to 17.11. The Kothari Committee in its Report made in 1976 pleaded for further reduction of
the percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test and strongly recommended that the
viva voce test should carry only 300 out of a total of 3000 marks. The Kothari Committee
pointed out that even where the percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test was
17.11, nearly one-fourth of the candidates selected owed their success to the marks obtained
by them at the viva voce test. This proportion was regarded by the Kothari Committee as
“somewhat on the high side”. It is significant to note that consequent upon the Kothari
Committee Report, the percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test in the competitive
examination for the Indian Administrative Service and other Allied Services was brought
down still further to 12.2. The result is that since the last few years, even for selection of
candidates in the Indian Administrative Service and other Allied Services where the
personality of the candidate and his personal characteristics and traits are extremely relevant
for the purpose of selection, the marks allocated for the viva voce test constitute only 12.2%
184
of the total marks. Now if it was found in the case of selections to the Indian Administrative
Service and other Allied Services that the allocation of even 17.11% marks for the viva voce
test was on the higher side and it was responsible for nearly one-fourth of the selected
candidates securing a place in the select list owing to the marks obtained by them at the viva
voce test, the allocation of 22.2% marks for the viva voce test would certainly be likely to
create a wider scope for arbitrariness. When the Kothari Committee, admittedly an Expert
Committee, constituted for the purpose of examining recruitment policy and selection
methods for the Indian Administrative Service and other Allied Services took the view that
the allocation of 17.11% marks for the viva voce test was on the higher side and required to
be reduced, it would be legitimate to hold that in case of selections to the Haryana Civil
Services (Executive Branch) and other Allied Services, which are services of similar nature in
the State, the allocation of 22.2% marks for the viva voce test was unreasonable. We must
therefore regard the allocation of 22.2% of the total marks for the viva voce test as infecting
the selection process with the vice of arbitrariness. - But the question which then arises for consideration is as to what is the effect of
allocation of such a high percentage of marks for the viva voce test, both in case of ex-service
officers and in case of other candidates, on the selections made by the Haryana Public Service
Commission. Though we have taken the view that the percentage of marks allocated for the
viva voce test in both these cases is excessive, we do not think we would be justified in the
exercise of our discretion in setting aside the selections made by the Haryana Public Service
Commission after the lapse of almost two years. The candidates selected by the Haryana
Public Service Commission have already been appointed to various posts and have been
working on these posts since the last about two years. Moreover the Punjab Civil Service
(Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 under which 33.3% marks in case of ex-service officers and
22.2% marks in case of other candidates have been allocated for the viva voce test have been
in force for almost 50 years and everyone has acted on the basis of these rules. If selections
made in accordance with the prescription contained in these rules are now to be set aside, it
will upset a large number of appointments already made on the basis of such selections and
the integrity and efficiency of the entire administrative machinery would be seriously
jeopardised. We do not therefore propose to set aside the selections made by the Haryana
Public Service Commission though they have been made on the basis of an unduly high
percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test. - Now if the allocation of such a high percentage of marks as 33.3 in case of ex-service
officers and 22.2 in case of other candidates, for the viva voce test is excessive, as held by us,
what should be the proper percentage of marks to be allocated for the viva voce test in both
these cases. So far as candidates in the general category are concerned we think that it would
be prudent and safe to follow the percentage adopted by the Union Public Service
Commission in case of selections to the Indian Administrative Service and other Allied
Services. The percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test by the Union Public
Service Commission in case of selections to the Indian Administrative Services and other
Allied Services is 12.2, and that has been found to be fair and just, as striking a proper
balance between the written examination and the viva voce test. We would therefore direct
that hereafter in case of selections to be made to the Haryana Civil Services (Executive
185
Branch) and other Allied Services, where the competitive examination consists of a written
examination followed by a viva voce test, the marks allocated for the viva voce test shall not
exceed 12.2% of the total marks taken into account for the purpose of selection. We would
suggest that this percentage should also be adopted by the Public Service Commissions in
other States, because it is desirable that there should be uniformity in the selection process
throughout the country and the practice followed by the Union Public Service Commission
should be taken as a guide for the State Public Service Commissions to adopt and follow. The
percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test in case of ex-service officers may, for
reasons we have already discussed, be somewhat higher than the percentage for the
candidates belonging to the general category. We would therefore direct that in case of exservice officers, having regard to the fact that they would ordinarily be middle-aged persons
with personalities fully developed, the percentage of marks allocated for the viva voce test
may be 25. Whatever selections are made by the Haryana Public Service Commission in the
future shall be on the basis that the marks allocated for the viva voce test shall not exceed
12.2% in case of candidates belonging to the general category and 25% in case of ex-service
officers. - Before we part with this judgment we would like to point out that the Public Service
Commission occupies a pivotal place of importance in the State and the integrity and
efficiency of its administrative apparatus depends considerably on the quality of the selections
made by the Public Service Commission. It is absolutely essential that the best and finest
talent should be drawn in the administration and administrative services must be composed of
men who are honest, upright and independent and who are not swayed by the political winds
blowing in the country. The selection of candidates for the administrative services must
therefore be made strictly on merits, keeping in view various factors which go to make up a
strong, efficient and people oriented administrator. This can be achieved only if the Chairman
and members of the Public Service Commission are eminent men possessing a high degree of
calibre, competence and integrity, who would inspire confidence in the public mind about the
objectivity and impartiality of the selections to be made by them. We would therefore like to
strongly impress upon every State Government to take care to see that its Public Service
Commission is manned by competent, honest and independent persons of outstanding ability
and high reputation who command the confidence of the people and who would not allow
themselves to be deflected by any extraneous considerations from discharging their duty of
making selections strictly on merit. Whilst making these observations we would like to make
it clear that we do not for a moment wish to suggest that the Chairman and members of the
Haryana Public Service Commission in the present case were lacking in calibre, competence
or integrity. - We would also like to point out that in some of the States, and the State of Haryana is
one of them, the practice followed is to invite a retired Judge of the High Court as an expert
when selections for recruitment to the Judicial Service of the State are being made and the
advice given by such retired High Court Judge who participates in the viva voce test as an
expert is sometimes ignored by the Chairman and members of the Public Service
Commission. This practice is in our opinion undesirable and does not commend itself to us.
When selections for the Judicial Service of the State are being made, it is necessary to
186
exercise the utmost care to see that competent and able persons possessing a high degree of
rectitude and integrity are selected, because if we do not have good, competent and honest
Judges, the democratic polity of the State itself will be in serious peril. It is therefore essential
that when selections to the Judicial Service are being made, a sitting Judge of the High Court
to be nominated by the Chief Justice of the State should be invited to participate in the
interview as an expert and since such sitting Judge comes as an expert who, by reason of the
fact that he is a sitting High Court Judge, knows the quality and character of the candidates
appearing for the interview, the advice given by him should ordinarily be accepted, unless
there are strong and cogent reasons for not accepting such advice and such strong and cogent
reasons must be recorded in writing by the Chairman and members of the Public Service
Commission. We are giving this direction to the Public Service Commission in every State
because we are anxious that the finest talent should be recruited in the Judicial Service and
that can be secured only by having a real expert whose advice constitutes a determinative
factor in the selection process. - We accordingly allow the appeals, set aside the judgment of the Division Bench of the
Punjab and Haryana High Court and reject the challenge to the validity of the selections made
by the Haryana Public Service Commission to the Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch)
and other Allied Services. But in view of the fact that an unduly large number of candidates
were called for interview and the marks allocated in the viva voce test were excessively high,
it is possible that some of the candidates who might have otherwise come in the select list
were left out of it, perhaps unjustifiably. We would therefore direct that all the candidates
who secured a minimum of 45% marks in the written examination but who could not find
entry in the select list, should be given one more opportunity of appearing in the competitive
examination which would now have to be held in accordance with the principles laid down in
this judgment and this opportunity should be given to them, even though they may have
passed the maximum age prescribed by the rules for recruitment to the Haryana Civil Services
(Executive Branch) and other Allied Services. We would direct that in the circumstances of
the case the fair order of costs would be that each party should bear and pay his own costs
throughout.
