Service Law – Jharkhand Eligibility Test – Eligibility of the candidates for appointment as lecturers – Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) issued advertisement on 19.07.2006 inviting applications for Jharkhand Eligibility Test – The test consisted of three papers; the first two papers were multiple choice questions and third paper was a descriptive type question paper – Candidates obtaining 50% marks in Paper I and II were eligible to take test in paper III – The writ petitioner obtained 50% marks in papers I and II – Thereafter, writ petitioner appeared in paper III – The JPSC fixed a cut off percentage of 60 for paper III which the writ petitioner did not attain and he was declared unsuccessful – Writ petition – High Court held that JPSC could not fix the minimum marks for paper III – On appeal, held: There were no minimum marks provided for paper III in the advertisement – It was for the moderation committee to decide what should be the cut-off marks – This could be done by the moderation committee even at a later stage – This was not a change brought about but an additional aspect brought in while determining the merit of the candidates who were found fit to be eligible for consideration for appointment of lecturers – High Court erred in holding that the JPSC could not fix the minimum marks for paper III – Therefore, judgment of the High Court set aside.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD : 1. A perusal of Clause 4.1 of the scheme clearly indicates that the moderation committee has been constituted only for the purpose of deciding the cut-off marks in each subject for declaring the result. The advertisement clearly indicates that only those candidates who obtained 50% marks in Paper I and II would be eligible to take the test in Paper III. The minimum qualifying marks in case of General/OBC candidates was 50%. At this stage, there was no need to fix the qualifying marks for Paper III. That need will arise only when the moderation committee meets and decides what should be the level of competence expected from the people who are to be considered for appointment as Lecturers. It is for the moderation committee to decide what should be the cut-off marks. There could be the subject where all the people who qualified Paper I and II get very low marks in Paper III and the moderation committee may be justified in lowering the standards and prescribing lower qualifying standards. On the other hand, there may be a subject where there are many candidates who do extremely well in Paper III and the moderation committee may decide to fix a higher minimum standard. The constitution of a moderation committee is normally done only to do this sort of moderation. [Para 6] [988-C-F]
2. As far as the finding of the High Court that the rules of the game were changed after the selection process had started, this Court is of the considered view that this is not the case as far as the present case is concerned. There were no minimum marks provided for Paper III in the advertisement. This could be done by the moderation committee even at a later stage. This is not a change brought about but an additional aspect brought in while determining the merit of the candidates who are found fit to be eligible for consideration for appointment of Lecturers. [Para 7][988-F-G]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.