Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

16.6 Despite this position the commission determined, for the first time and introduced qualifying marks/standard (described by the commission as cut-off marks), after conclusion of stage of preliminary examination and the stage of written test and the stage of interview and after general / common merit list was prepared on the basis of aggregate marks secured by the candidates during the written test and interview.

17. The Examination Rules prescribe the procedure for conducting examinations for selection of candidates for the said two posts. Rule 3 of the said Examination Rules, 2008 prescribes, inter alia, that upon receiving requisition from the Government the Commission shall hold combined competitive examination for selection of candidates. Rule 4 of the said Examination Rules provides that examination shall be held in two successive stages whereby preliminary examination for selection of candidates and then main examination (written test and interview) will be conducted. The said preliminary examination will comprise objective type test. At the second stage, main examination for final selection of candidates has to be conducted. The said main examination comprises written test and interview. Part-I of the Schedule to the said Examination Rules, 2008 prescribes, inter alia, that the preliminary examination shall consist one paper of objective type and shall carry 150 marks. It also provides that the number of candidates to be allowed to appear in the main examination shall be about 15 times the approximate number of vacancies advertised. With reference to the main examination, the said Part I of the schedule provides that the written examination shall consist five papers of conventional type. Part III further provides that paper one, paper two and paper three will be compulsory papers and each paper will carry 100 marks and paper four and paper five will be optional papers and each paper will carry 200 marks. Rule 9 of Examination Rules, prescribes the procedure to be followed by the Commission and provides, inter alia, that the Commission shall arrange names of the candidates in order of merit on the basis of aggregate marks finally awarded to each candidate in the main examination (i.e. written and interview test) and in that order, the Commission shall recommend the candidates for appointment. The said provision under Rule 9 is subject to the proviso which prescribes that where the vacancies reserved for the candidates belonging to SC or ST or SEBC category cannot be filled - up on the basis of qualifying aggregate marks fixed for general category, the Commission may relax the standard of aggregate marks to make up for the deficiency in the reserved posts. Thus, the said rule also confers power to relax the qualifying standard in the event vacancies reserved for candidates belonging to SC, ST or SEBC category cannot be filled-up. Rule 19 obliges the commission to fix qualifying marks and it further provides that the candidates who obtain minimum qualifying marks, as may be fixed by the Commission in the preliminary examination shall be allowed to appear in the main examination subject to their satisfying the eligibility criteria and that the candidates who obtain minimum qualifying marks as may be fixed by the Commission in the main examination (written) shall be called for interview. The expression "the candidates who have obtained minimum qualifying marks as may be fixed by the commission... ..." signifies and clarifies that the said provisions oblige the GPSC to fix "minimum qualifying marks" at the stage of preliminary examination stage (for allowing entry to appear for written test) and at the stage of main examination / written test (for allowing entry to appear in interview). The said expression indicates that the candidates who obtain marks fixed by GPSC as minimum qualification can enter into next level. The said Rule 19 also empowers the Commission to relax the said qualifying standard at the stage of examination i.e. in preliminary examination or in the main examination (written), if the Commission is of the opinion that sufficient number of candidates from SC or ST or SEBC category are not likely to be available for main examination (written) or for interview which is clarified by the expression "... ... ... may be allowed to appear........by relaxing the standard .....".

18.2 On this count, it is pertinent that for the purpose of determining the qualifying standard the respondent GPSC first picked-up the General / Unreserved Category and took into account total number of vacancies in that category. Thereafter the respondent GPSC started from the candidate at the top in the common merit list (i.e. the candidate with highest marks) and, while descending, it started identifying only male candidates belonging to the said / particular category and proceeded in descending order by taking into account marks of only male candidates in that particular category (i.e. excluding all female candidates/marks obtained by female candidates in that category) and continued to descend in similar manner until it reached the male candidate who, depending on the number of notified vacancies in the particular category, would be the last male candidate required to fill-up the vacancies in that particular category. The marks secured by such "last male candidate" of that particular category are treated and adopted and applied by GPSC as the qualifying marks/standard (what is described by GPSC as "cut-off marks") for the respective category. The procedure and method followed by GPSC is explained by it in paragraphs No.6.2 to 6.4 of its affidavit dated 23.2.2015 filed in SCA No.14849 of 2014 and it is further explained in para No.2 of its additional affidavit dated 24.2.2015. 18.3 Besides this even in the notification dated 25.9.2014 GPSC itself has admitted and stated that: "The candidates at Rank No...... ST being female candidates have been selected after relaxing the minimum qualifying standard prescribed for male candidates of their respective categories." (Emphasis supplied) 18.4 From the details mentioned in said affidavits it has emerged that for combined (i.e. ACF + RFO) 84 position of unreserved / general category, 26 position are reserved (@ 30% of total number of notified vacancy for the said category) for female candidates and for selecting female candidates for said position, the marks secured by the male candidate in general category whose name is listed at Sr.No.78 in the general / common merit list is treated as the marks of last candidate in general / unreserved category (though only 58 position / vacancies are to filled-up) and the marks secured by the said male candidate at Sr.No.78 is recognized as minimum qualifying marks/standard for the female candidates in general / unreserved category on the premise that the said candidate at Sr.No.78 is last male candidate to enter the selection list in genera/unreserved category and the said marks are then adopted and applied as benchmark for selection of female candidates and for complying the reserved quota. In response to the query, the learned counsel for GPSC submitted and clarified that the standard/basis which came to be fixed, settled and adopted in above mentioned manner (as "qualifying marks/standard") is treated as yardstick and benchmark for all purposes including the process and purpose of filling-up the reserved quota for women in other three categories as well and for the candidates seeking selection in the quota reserved for persons holding special qualification.

21.5 There is an additional reason which also supports and justifies the allegation and contention against the commissioner's action of introducing and applying qualifying marks/standard determined and prescribed by the respondent GPSC. The minimum qualifying marks/standard must be clear and definite and cannot be uncertain and oscillating. However, on comparative reading of the notification dated 25.9.2014 and the notification dated 23.1.2015, it has emerged that in the subsequent notification (i.e. revised selection list notified on 23.1.2015) GPSC has taken into account different marks/standard (as compared to the marks/standard taken as qualifying marks/cut-off marks by GPSC at the time when the selection list / notification dated 25.9.2014 was issued) as qualifying marks/standard. This aspect becomes clear from the following comparative table:

45.8 The said Rule 9 itself makes it clear that in cases where separate Examination / Recruitment Rules are applicable and in operation, then the appointment to various posts shall be governed by the said Rules. Thus, in view of the fact that in present cases, there are separate Examination Rules (viz. ACF and RFO Combined Examination Rules, 2008), the said Rule 9 would not be applicable in the matter of appointment including the allotment of post.

45.9 In this context, it is relevant to recall that certain candidates from SC category, ST category and SEBC category have been considered and treated certain reserved category candidates (i.e. GPSC has classified certain reserved category candidates) as meritorious reserved category candidates by comparing evaluating the marks obtained by them (during written test and interview) vis-a-vis the marks fixed (in the earlier discussed manner) by the GPSC as qualifying marks / standard. Thus, the GPSC compared the marks of the reserved category candidates with the marks fixed by it as qualifying marks / standard and those reserved category candidates who secured more marks than the qualifying marks / standard have been treated as meritorious reserved category candidates and such meritorious reserved category candidates are placed in general / unreserved (open) category.