Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohammad Arif Shaikh vs Registrar General High Court Of Madhya ... on 28 January, 2014
Writ Petition No.794/2014
28.01.2014
Shri Akshay Sapre, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri V.S.Shroti, Senior Advocate with Shri Vikram Johri,
Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 2.
Heard counsel for the parties.
We had adjourned this matter on two occasions to reassure ourselves that if the principal contention of the petitioner was to be accepted whether the petitioner would still get into the stream due to possible reduction of benchmark/ cut off marks below 75% of Center No.1 and whether that exercise is imperative in the fact situation of the present case.
Having perused the record produced by the High Court through counsel, it is noticed that the petitioner participated in the selection process against general category. Only 43 posts are earmarked for the General Category. For inviting candidates for further examination/interview the High Court decided to invite around 430 candidates which is 10 times of the number of posts in general category. Keeping that in mind the benchmark/cut off marks was determined as 75%. Inasmuch as around 418 candidates secured above 75% from Centre No.1, who had appeared in the first examination, as against around 77 candidates, who appeared in the second examination. The aggregate number of candidates who secured more than 75% is 495 which itself is far above the requirement of 430 candidates. Thus, the question of reducing the cut off marks below 75% does not arise. That cut off marks in any case is just and reasonable.
Suffice it to observe that if the grievance of the petitioner that unequals are treated equally was to be accepted even then the petitioner on his own merit cannot succeed till the High Court Writ Petition No.794/2014 decides to reduce the benchmark/cut off to 74% as the petitioner has secured 74% marks. If the High Court were to reduce the cut off marks to 74%, the total candidates would rise to 595 which will be far in excess of the requirement of 430 candidates, thus making the entire process unwieldy. In public interest, therefore, it may not be appropriate to upset the entire selection process which has progressed to an advanced stage, on this argument, at the instance of the petitioner, who in any case cannot succeed on his own merit having secured only 74% marks.
Accordingly, we decline to interfere in this petition. Dismissed.
(A.M.Khanwilkar) (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) Chief Justice Judge HS