Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. The respondents have not denied the aforesaid factual matrix, however, would submit that the Commission unanimously decided to prescribe the cut off marks of 25% for Unreserved candidates and 20% for reserved categories in the Interview. It is further submitted that the Commission has discretion to fix minimum cut off marks in any paper or part thereof of the written examinations and interview keeping in view the requirements of the job and the importance of personality for efficient discharge of duties in the said job. It is further submitted that since aberrations are noticed in the written examinations vis-a-vis interview marks in respect of some of the candidates, to eliminate the cases where the co-relation between performance in written examinations and interview is extremely poor, after due deliberations and analysis, it was decided to fix the minimum cut off marks for interview also. The purpose of fixing the cut off marks was to select best quality candidates, who will be performing the most difficult task of maintaining law and order with right degree of sensitivity towards the general public with special focus on the weaker sections of the Society and hence, there is no illegality or irregularity in fixing the cut off marks for interview.

Once, rules provides for a certain procedure, the Selection Committee, cannot supplant, i.e., by prescribing or following any different procedure, but can supplement to the said prescribed procedure.

Fixing the qualifying/minimum/cut off or some criteria for written examination, even after the commencement of the process of selection, to short list the candidates for participating the interview, is permissible, but fixing the qualifying/minimum/cut off marks for interview, after commencement of the selection process, is not permissible.

29. Firstly, a perusal of the impugned Para No.3 of the Annexure A1 final result, i.e., fixation of cut off marks for the interview, clearly indicates that the same does not fall under the aforesaid principles No.5 and 6, i.e., fixation of Bench Mark and that the same falls under principle No.4, i.e., fixing the cut off marks for the interview, after commencement of the selection process. The power of the respondent-Commission to fix the minimum `cut off marks for the written examination as well as for the interview is not disputed but fixing the `cut off marks for the interview after the selection process has been commenced, is only disputed by the applicants.

30. It is the admitted case that the respondent-Commission for the reasons best known to it but not explained in their pleadings, has not fixed the `cut of marks for the interview before the commencement of the selection process, though it can do so, as per the settled principles of law. Further, contrary to the settled law, the Commission chosen to fix the minimum cut off marks for the interview after the commencement of the selection process. The contention of the respondent-SSC, that they are empowered to fix the cut off marks, even for interview, for selecting the best quality candidates, keeping in view the requirements of job, and the importance of personality for efficient discharge of duties of the said job, Sub-Inspector in the present case, is not negatived by Courts. But, the SSC being the prime recruiting agency, was in full knowledge of the requirements of the job even before commencement of the selection process, while issuing the advertisement, has consciously chosen not to provide such a procedure which will enable it to prescribe any cut off marks for the interview. It is brought to our notice, the respondent-SSC, now for the recruitment of Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police, etc. for the year 2013, vide their Corrigendum to the Notification for Recruitment of Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police, CAPFs and Asst. SI in CISF and IO in NCB Examination, 2013, reserved its right to prescribe, at its option, separate cut off marks in interview for general and reserved category candidates.