Mayank Garg v. Delhi High Court

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying that direction be issued to the respondent (hereafter ‘DHC’) to ‘recheck/re-examine/reassess’ the petitioner’s answer-sheets in respect of examination paper, Law-III. The petitioner has scored 89 marks out of the maximum of 200 marks in the said paper. This is one mark short of qualifying threshold of 45%. The petitioner’s aggregate marks of all papers is 437 marks out of a 2022:DHC:3589-DB maximum of 750 marks. This is the highest amongst all unsuccessful candidates and is significantly higher than the qualifying cut off of 50%. The petitioner has been eliminated from the competitive examination for appointment to Delhi Higher Judiciary Services, solely on account of not securing 45% marks in the examination paper, Law-III.

2. The principal question that falls for consideration of this court is whether the petitioner is entitled to seek re-evaluation of his answersheets in respect of the examination paper, Law-III.

3. The relevant facts necessary to address the aforesaid controversy are as under:-

3.1. On 23.02.2022, DHC had issued an advertisement for conducting the Delhi Higher Judicial Services Examination for filling up 45(fortyfive) vacancies.

3.2. The petitioner is a practicing advocate and met the eligibility criteria for participating in the selection process for being appointed to Delhi Higher Judicial Service (hereafter ‘DHJS’). The selection for DHJS is a competitive one. The DHJS examination is a three-tier process. First tier is the DHJS Preliminary examination. The second is the candidates taking the DHJS Main (written) examination. And the third is a viva voce test.

3.3. The DHJS Preliminary examination is a screening test comprising of one paper of multiple choice based objective type questions, carrying a maximum of 150 marks. The minimum qualifying marks for a general category candidate is fixed at 50% and for those of the reserved categories is fixed at 45%. Those candidates, securing the minimum qualifying marks in the preliminary examination, are eligible to be admitted to undertake the DHJS Main (written) examination. It is also stipulated that the number of candidates to be admitted to the DHJS Main (written) examination shall not be more than twenty times the total number of advertised vacancies in each category. The candidates qualifying the DHJS Main (written) examination are admitted to viva voce.

3.4. In all 1909 (one thousand nine hundred and nine) number of candidates appeared in the DJHS preliminary examination held on 03.04.2022 and 123 (one hundred and twenty three) number of general category candidates secured the minimum qualifying marks. These candidates were admitted to the DHJS Main (written) examination.

3.5. The DHJS Main (written) examination comprises of four papers. The brief description of the papers along the maximum marks, as set out in the Appendix to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 is set out below-: MAIN (WRITTEN) EXAMINATION Papers Description Max. Marks. Paper-I General Knowledge & Language – This is to test the candidate’s knowledge of current affairs etc. and power of expression in English. Credit will be given both for substance and expression. Conversely deduction will be made for bad expression, faults of grammar and misuse of words etc. Paper-II Law – I – Constitution of India, Code of Civil Procedure, Indian Evidence Act, Limitation Act, Registration Act and such other subjects as may be specified by the High Court from time to time. Paper- III Law – II – Transfer of Property Act, Indian Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Partnership Act, Specific Relief Act, Arbitration Law, Personal Law and such other subjects as may be specified by the High court from time to time. Paper -IV Law – III – Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Indian Evidence Act and such other subjects as may be specified by the High court from time to time.

3.6. In all 140 candidates appeared in all papers of DHJS Main (written) examination. The minimum qualifying marks as prescribed in respect of the DHJS Main (written) examination is 45% in each paper and 50% in aggregate for the general category. The qualifying marks are 5% less for the candidates belonging to the reserved category (SC, ST and Persons with Disability).

3.7. Out of the 140 candidates, who appeared in the DHJS Main (written) examination, 45 (forty five) candidates were short-listed as they met the criteria of the minimum qualifying marks. Nine candidates did not appear in all papers and thus, did not qualify the said examination. 86 (eighty-six) number of candidates, who appeared in all papers, were found to be unsuccessful.

3.8. The marks awarded to the qualifying candidates have not been disclosed, however, the marks awarded to the unsuccessful candidates, in the DHJS Main (written) examination, have been declared. The petitioner has scored an aggregate of 437 marks in all papers, which is significantly higher than the qualifying threshold of 50% or 375 marks. The petitioner’s score is the highest amongst the unsuccessful candidates whose marks have been disclosed.

3.9. A tabular statement indicating the marks scored by the petitioner in the four papers is set out below:-

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        Sl.No.   Roll No.   Name     Category   General     Law-I    Law-II   Law-     Total    │
│                                                Knowledge   (200     (200     III      Marks    │
│                 (Mains)                                                                        │
│                                                &           Marks)   Marks)   (200     (750     │
│                                                Language    Pass     Pass     Marks)   Marks)   │
│                                                (150        Marks    Marks    Pass     Pass     │
│                                                Marks)      90       90       Marks    Marks    │
│                                                Pass                          90       375      │
│                                                Marks                                           │
│                                                67.50                                           │
├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│        86       095        Mayank   General    83          134      131      89       437      │
│                            Garg                                                                │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

0.[5] marks less than the qualifying cut-off. Marks of another candidate are short by 1.[5] marks in the same paper. There is also a similarly placed candidate as the petitioner, who has secured 89 marks in Law-III and has not been selected even though his aggregate marks in all papers is above 50%.

23. If any paper is to be revaluated, it would also be necessary to reevaluate the answer-sheets of these candidates as well.