record and marking pattern he was entitled to
8.25 marks. He was also awarded only 6 marks out of 20 in the interview,
which ... least 8.25 marks
under A03 but was awarded only 4 marks and he was further given only
6 marks out of 20 in the interview
applicant is falling short of only 2 marks for empanelment inspite of having secured the highest mark in the written test for professional ability ... note here that the applicant had made a complaint about the arbitrariness in marking in the original DPC. The same was investigated into
applicant has been awarded less and disproportionate marks in an arbitrary manner as no model answer sheet was used for evaluating the answer sheets ... entitled to get full marks in the objective type answers and proportionate marks in narrative type answers. The marks awarded to the applicant are less
have consistently
awarded the applicant 53 or 54 marks in the evaluation,
allegedly due to arbitrary and incorrect scoring, whereas
proper assessment would have entitled ... Total 100* 53**
Marks
** Marks have been assessed as per MOD ID No 19(2)/2017-D(Lab) dated
09.01.2018
** Marks on terminal benefit
have consistently
awarded the applicant 53 or 54 marks in the evaluation,
allegedly due to arbitrary and incorrect scoring, whereas
proper assessment would have entitled ... Total 100* 53**
Marks
** Marks have been assessed as per MOD ID No 19(2)/2017-D(Lab) dated
09.01.2018
** Marks on terminal benefit
further stated that the respondents have
also not disclosed the marks of last selected candidate and
have failed to follow the proper procedure laid down ... stated that the criteria of rejection of his case below 55 marks
is arbitrary, hence the impugned order cannot be sustained
in the eyes
candidates for 73 vacancies under
the compassionate appointment quota. However, erroneous
marking led to the applicant being awarded only 50 points
instead of 59. Despite ... points), the applicant was not
selected. Moreover, inconsistent marking on 30.08.2019 and
26.03.2020 further demonstrated arbitrary decision-making.
The respondents also failed to create
process
of appointment on account of an illegal and arbitrary grant of
moderation of marks. The Government in its Order dated 22-
12-2010 cancelled
mark
ACR of the period relevant to promotion need to be disclosed". The
respondents have never communicated to the applicant the below bench
mark ... basis of non communicated below
bench grading of mark APAR is totally illegal, arbitrary and against the
principle of natural justice
average' or 'good' entries,
it would become arbitrary (and hence illegal) since it may
adversely affect the incumbent's chances ... India (supra) that
arbitrariness violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
20. Thus it is not only when there is a bench mark
