1988 (5) TMI 369 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court Upholds 33% Mark Requirement in Viva-Voce Tests for Civil Services

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Recruitment Rules requiring a minimum of 33% marks in the viva-voce test for certain civil services. It found ... - Issues Involved:1. Validity of the Recruitment Rules prescribing minimum qualifying marks in the viva-voce test.2. Constitutionality of the High Court's decision to strike down the rule requiring 33% minimum marks in the viva-voce for certain services.3. Legitimacy of the High Court's reliance on precedents and reports to invalidate the rule.4. The role and significance of viva-voce in the selection process for higher civil services.Summary:Issue 1: Validity of the Recruitment Rules prescribing minimum qualifying marks in the viva-voce test.The appeals arose from a judgment by the High Court of Rajasthan which declared as arbitrary and unconstitutional the rule requiring candidates for Administrative Service, Police Service, and Forest Service to secure a minimum of 33% marks in the viva-voce test. The Supreme Court examined whether this prescription in the Recruitment Rules made u/s Article 309 of the Constitution was valid.Issue 2: Constitutionality of the High Court's decision to strike down the rule requiring 33% minimum marks in the viva-voce for certain services.The Supreme Court found that the High Court had erred in striking down the rule. It held that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks of 33% in the viva-voce examination does not incur any constitutional infirmity. The Court emphasized that such a rule is neither unreasonable nor arbitrary, especially for services requiring higher personality traits.Issue 3: Legitimacy of the High Court's reliance on precedents and reports to invalidate the rule.The Supreme Court noted that the High Court misinterpreted the principles laid down in Ajay Hasia, Lila Dhar, and Ashok Kumar Yadav cases. These precedents did not address the issue of minimum qualifying marks in viva-voce but dealt with the proportion of marks allocated to the viva-voce relative to the written examination. The Court also observed that the High Court's reliance on the Kothari Commission Report was misplaced as it was merely indicative of a policy trend.Issue 4: The role and significance of viva-voce in the selection process for higher civil services.The Supreme Court upheld the significance of the viva-voce test in assessing personality traits necessary for higher administrative roles. It cited previous judgments and expert opinions supporting the use of viva-voce to evaluate qualities that written tests cannot measure. The Court stated that the requirement of higher traits of personality for services like Administrative and Police Services is a reasonable expectation.Conclusion:The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's judgment and upholding the validity of the impugned rules. The writ petitions challenging the rules were dismissed, and the select-list dated 17.7.1986 was validated. The Court reiterated that mere possibility of abuse does not justify invalidation of a rule and emphasized the need for judicial restraint in policy matters. No order as to costs was made.