otherwise obtained the minimum
qualifying marks out of 18 marks. He further held that even if marks were
to be given for the certificates, they ... marks, then the cut-off marks
ought to have been assessed out of 18 marks, and the marks for the
certificates ought to have been
University Of Calcutta & Ors vs Pritam Rooj on 5 February, 2009
Equivalent citations: AIR
University Of Calcutta & Ors vs Pritam Rooj on 5 February, 2009
Author: Dipankar Datta
minimum qualifying marks in the interview, they could not
be selected only because their aggregate marks were higher than the marks scored by the
last ... 4835 of 2011 Page 7 of 13
found marks to be arbitrary, they should have challenged the same at the very first
instance. Instead Petitioners
marks obtained in the
English test were also included in the overall marks in the written test;
(d) No weightage of marks for the written ... marks
General knowledge : 10 marks
Skill/aptitude : 10 marks
Personality : 10 marks
Proficiency in Hindi : 5 marks
Achievements : 5 marks
Total marks : 100 marks
secured 96.50 marks, whereas the petitioner got 95.50 marks.
Further award of 3 marks for business ability/acumen was also arbitrary for
the reason that ... awarding the marks. The
petitioner had experience in all three columns. The maximum marks, which
could be awarded for experience were 4 marks.
Besides this
while awarding marks in the interview arbitrarily awarded 8 marks to the
petitioner, whereas 19 marks has been awarded to the 4th respondent ... order to eliminate the petitioner, he has been awarded 8 marks and 19
marks to the 4th respondent respectively.
12. Learned State counsel was directed
marks
Personal Interview 50 marks
7. The minimum required marks to qualify for promotion to
the post of Principal Scientist was 60 marks ... marks for research publication/achievement,
20 marks for recommendation of superiors and 50 marks for
personal interview out of a total of 100 marks
General Manager and submits that there is an
arbitrary and illegal adjustment of marks in the garb of Potential
Assessment (PA).
48 The Petitioner refers ... complete arbitrariness, favoritism,
nepotism and lack of transparency. Mr. Buch would, therefore, submit
that the Petitioner's allegations stand proved by the marks allotted
General Manager and submits that there is an
arbitrary and illegal adjustment of marks in the garb of Potential
Assessment (PA).
48 The Petitioner refers ... complete arbitrariness, favoritism,
nepotism and lack of transparency. Mr. Buch would, therefore, submit
that the Petitioner's allegations stand proved by the marks allotted
