TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 1177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral order No. 204 of 2003 inviting applications for promotion to six Class III posts from amongst Class IV employees of the Civil Court at Muzaffarpur. The selection was to be made on the basis of a fresh written test and interview, Twenty seven candidates appeared in the written examination which was conducted on 20 April 2004 of whom fourteen qualified. These candidates were interviewed on 7 July 2004. Eighty five marks were fixed for the written examination and fifteen marks for the interview. The appointment committee selected six candidates on the basis of merit for appointment to the six Class III posts by promotion. The select list was submitted to the High Court on 26 July 2004. The High Court declined to approve the select list on the ground that the marks allotted for the written examination were not in accordance with the Court's General letter No. 1 of 1995 and the Rules of 1992, 1998 and 2001 covering Bihar Civil Court Staff. By a letter dated 19 August 2004, the Registrar (Administration) directed the District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur to hold a fresh examination fixing ninety marks for the written examination by treating the qualifying marks as forty five. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. The learned Single Judge held that under Rule 6 of the Bihar Civil Court Staff (Class III and Class IV) (Amendment) Rules, 2001, the written examination was to carry eighty five marks and the interview fifteen marks (instead and in place of the earlier requirement of ninety marks and ten marks respectively). In the view of the learned Single Judge, once the rules, which have been made Under Article 309, were amended in 2001, the earlier Rules would stand superseded and the General letter of the High Court would not have the effect of overriding the statutory rules. The examination, it was noticed was held after the new Rules had come into force in July 2001, In consequence, the learned Single Judge held that the notification fixing eighty-five marks for the written examination and fifteen marks for the interview had been correctly issued by the District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur who as a result, was directed to declare the results of all those who had participated in the first selection examination. 6. After the order of the learned Single Judge, a direction was issued by which six persons who had been appointed to Class III posts were revert....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on in terms of the preceding rule, the Appointment Committee shall hold a separate examination of the eligible candidates and call for interview only such candidates who obtain the qualifying marks in the written examination. 9. The Bihar Civil Court Staff (Class III and Class IV) (Amendment) Rules, 2001 were notified with effect from 11 July 2001. Rules 5 to 12 were substituted. Rule 5(iv) governs the mode of recruitment of Class III employees, Rule 5(iv)(d) provides for a written test of eighty five marks and an interview consisting of fifteen marks, totally aggregating to one hundred marks, The qualifying marks for the written examination are to be forty five. Rule 6 provides for appointment by promotion in the following terms: Appointment by Promotion-(i) The appointments to Class III posts by promotion from Class IV posts shall also be made by the Appointment Committee on merit-cum-seniority basis; (ii) Twenty percent of vacant Class III posts shall be made reserved for promotion from Class IV employees who possess the minimum educational qualification and have three year experience in the post held by them; (iii) For promotion i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ms of its General letter No. 1 of 1995. Pursuant thereto, a circular was issued in the form of a new General order bearing No. 171 of 2004 on 8 October 2004 which stipulated that in terms of the directions issued by the High Court on 19 August 2004, a fresh written examination would be held carrying ninety marks (with qualifying marks as forty five) followed by an interview of ten marks. Candidates who had applied earlier were not required to apply afresh. 11. The Appellants participated in the fresh process of selection. If the Appellants were aggrieved by the decision to hold a fresh process, they did not espouse their remedy. Instead, they participated in the fresh process of selection and it was only upon being unsuccessful that they challenged the result in the writ petition. This was clearly not open to the Appellants. The principle of estoppel would operate. 12. The law on the subject has been crystalized in several decisions of this Court. In Chandra Prakash Tiwari v. Shakuntala Shukla (2002) 6 SCC 127, this Court laid down the principle that when a candidate appears at an examination without objection and is subsequently found to be not successful, a challenge to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) 1 SCC 150, candidates who had participated in the selection process were aware that they were required to possess certain specific qualifications in computer operations. The Appellants had appeared in the selection process and after participating in the interview sought to challenge the selection process as being without jurisdiction. This was held to be impermissible. In Ramesh Chandra Shah v. Anil Joshi (2013) 11 SCC 309, candidates who were competing for the post of Physiotherapist in the State of Uttrakhand participated in a written examination held in pursuance of an advertisement. This Court held that if they had cleared the test, the Respondents would not have raised any objection to the selection process or to the methodology adopted. Having taken a chance of selection, it was held that the Respondents were disentitled to seek relief Under Article 226 and would be deemed to have waived their right to challenge the advertisement or the procedure of selection. This Court held that: 18. It is settled law that a person who consciously takes part in the process of selection cannot, thereafter, turn around and question the method of selection and its outcome. In ....