mark for the general candidates was specified in an
arbitrary manner inasmuch as the marks obtained by the 240th
candidate was made the basis thereof ... submission of the learned counsel that the cut-off marks fixed was wholly
arbitrary so as to offend the principles of equality enshrined under Article
where 75 marks out of
a total of 275 marks were allocated for the oral interview,
this Court observed that the marks allocated for interview ... State Electricity Board
keeping 40 marks for interview and 40 marks for group
discussion being arbitrary. We direct that in future the
marks for interview
decided to call
36 candidates who had scored the highest marks in
the written test and these candidates were called to
appear for an interview ... State could reduce the cut-off marks. If the cut-off mark
specified by the State is arbitrary, Article 14 would be
attracted. The Tribunal
that the circular dated 4.4.1995 would
apply providing for assignment of 87=% marks for written/ trade test and
12=% for the oral test (personal interview ... State could reduce
the cut-off marks. If the cut-off mark specified by the State is arbitrary,
Article 14 would be attracted. The Tribunal
Selection Regulations which held the field for over 33 years, as unjust,
arbitrary, unreasonable and that which arbitrarily affected the legitimate and
normal expectations ... fair treatment. The exercise of
discretionary power wide of mark would bread arbitrary,
unreasonable or unfair actions and would not be
consistent with reason
fixed for evaluating the marks which were to be given to each individual
candidate but despite the same 5 marks had been awarded ... candidate it had an
absolute and arbitrary discretion regarding how they were
to access and award marks during the time of interview
Further more
category. The Committee, therefore,
took out the marks allotted in the aforesaid two
categories and the total marks obtained by the three
candidates were found ... aforesaid findings proceeded to examine
whether there was any arbitrary allotment of marks to
any of the candidates and on examining the first
category, namely
holding that allocation of 33-3 per cent of marks for viva voce test as arbitrary, however, did not interfere with the appointments made
further submitted that allocation of marks for judging the merit of the candidates cannot be said to be arbitrary.
16. It was further submitted that ... that even 30 marks allotted for interview for testing the suitability of the candidates objectively cannot be said to be arbitrary. Learned Counsel in this
filed a writ
petition before the High Court of Karnataka which was marked as Writ
Petition Nos.1651-1685 of 2005. In the said writ ... true copy of which is produced and
marked as Annexure-J since the same is unjust,
arbitrary and opposed to the scheme of the
Industrial
