Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"'The object of viva-voce examination is to assess the candidates' intelligence, general knowledge, personality, aptitude and suitability."

The learned senior counsel for petitioners submitted that when a candidates is orally interviewed, the members of the committee should assign separate marks for the different faculties of the concerned candidate namely, intelligence, general knowledge, etc, as laid down in the rule and that does not appear to have been done by the interviewing committee and hence the entire viva voce test is vitiated. In this connection, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in Minor A. Peeriakaruppan & Sobha Joseph v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. (1971 (1) SCC 38).

13.It is not possible to agree with this contention. So far as rule 10(1)(b) is concerned it does not provide for any separate assessment of marks for candidates at viva voce examination faculty-wise, that is on intelligence, general knowledge, etc. listed in the said rule. On the contrary, it appears that as per the said rule, while conducting viva voce examination the Committee has to keep in view the main object of assessing such candidates in the light of the guidelines given therein. In other words, the interviewing committee has to keep in view the overall performance of the candidates at the oral inter-view and while doing so their intelligence, general knowledge, personality, aptitude and suitability have to be kept in the centre. The rule merely lays down the object of assessing such candidates in the viva voce examination. It is a general guideline given to the interviewing committee members. Therefore,.it is not possible to agree with the submission of the senior counsel for petitioners that the members of the interview committee must separately assess and give marks on different listed topics faculty-wise as per the said rule. So far as the decision of this Court in Minor A. Peeriakaruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. is concerned it has to be kept in view that this Court was dealing with admissions to M.B.B.S. course in the State of Tamil Nadu. The selection committee was constituted for assessing the merits of the concerned applicants for such admissions at oral interview after written test. 75 marks were assigned for oral interview. The selection committee was. asked to award these marks on the basis of following five tests

1. Sports of National Cadet Corps ac-

tivities;

2. Extra curricular special services;

3. General physical condition and endurance;

4. General ability; and

5. Aptitude.

14.Now it becomes at once clear that when 75 marks were to be assigned to a candidate called for oral interview on the basis of the aforesaid five types of performances by the candidate, the assessment on first three tests would depend upon documentary evidence regarding his career record which the candidates can furnish to the interview committee while the last two tests will depend upon his performance at the interview. In view of this hybrid type of tests for which assessment was to be made at the oral intervire, 75 marks assigned for all these five tests necessarily had to be split up and from the carrier record of the candidate, separate marks had to be assigned for first three tests and that necessarily required separate assessment of marks on the remaining two heads of tests. It is in the light of this requirement of peculiar type of marking at the oral inter-