Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(v) Dr. Pradeep Jain and others vs. Union of India and others; (1984) 3 SCR 942- In this case, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court gave emphasis that merit cannot be judged on the basis of marks only.

[20] Court has given due consideration to the submissions made by the parties and also the materials placed before the Court. In the general instructions against Sl. No.9 it was mentioned that the institute reserved the right to modify/defer or cancel the advertisement/recruitment at any stage of processing without assigning any reasons. Against Sl. No.10 it was also noted that the institute has the right to set norms higher than the minimum eligibility criteria and areas of specialization while short listing, taking into accounts the specific requirements of the individual departments, and the short-listing norms may not be uniform across the departments/posts of the Institute and shall be binding on all the applicants. Against Sl. No.12 it was further mentioned that the essential qualifications, requirements and credit points are the minimum criteria only for deciding the eligibility and this shall not ensure short-listings for further selection processes. The institute reserves rights to set a higher criterion for short listing. The institute reserves the right to screen and call only those candidates who are found prima-facie suitable for being considered by the Selection Committee. Thus, just mere fulfilling the prescribed conditions would not entitle the candidates to be called for presentation and interview. It was further noted therein that the institute reserves the right to restrict the number of candidates to be called for interview to a reasonable limit on the basis of qualifications and experience higher than the minimum prescribed in the advertisement and other academic achievements. Against Sl. No.13, it is also stated that departments will make attempt to set "short-listing criteria" that can be easily implemented. But, considering the multiple attributes that need to be considered, it may become necessary to make case by case exceptions. Against Sl. No.15 further provision was kept that if required, written tests may be conducted for candidates in the specified department(s) and based on the performance in the written test, candidates will be shortlisted for the subsequent selection process i.e., presentation and interview after documents verification. However, the institute may call the candidates directly for presentation and interview, without any written test.

[25] Even in the notification dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure 7) whereby general notice was published regarding the dates of seminar presentation and interview for all disciplines, it was clearly mentioned that only those candidates who are recommended based on evaluation of seminar presentation would be interviewed by the selection committee. Said notification was issued on 25.04.2025 and date of his seminar presentation of the petitioner was fixed on 28.05.2025 and date of personal interview was fixed on the following day. Therefore, he got sufficient time i.e. of more than one month to challenge the said notification but he did not do so, rather being fully aware of the said terms of short-listing, he participated in seminar presentation. Therefore, he cannot challenge such selection process now just because his performance in the seminar presentation was not satisfactory to the assessment of the recruiting authority. Law is fairly settled that if a candidate takes a calculated chance and appears at the interview, then, only because the result of interview is not palatable to him, he cannot turn round and subsequently contend that process of interview was unfair or the selection committee was not properly constituted. Said principle has been iterated both in Madan Lal (Supra) and Marripati Nagaraja (Supra).