Cut-off’s by moderation committee can be decided only after results publication.

Sarthak Khandelwal | Kirit P. Mehta School Of Law, NMIMS University, Mumbai | 23rd December 2019

JHARKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR. | CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9441 OF 2019.

Facts of Case:

The Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) issued an advertisement on 19.07.06 inviting applications   from candidates desirous of competing in the Jharkhand Eligibility Test (JET). This test is meant to determine the eligibility of the candidates for appointment of lecturers in universities and colleges in the state of Jharkhand. And is conducted as per the guidelines issued by the university grant commission (UGC).

The test consists of three papers – the first two papers are multiple choice questions to be answered on an Optical Mark Reader (OMR) out of which one is a general paper and the other one is of specific subject for which the candidate has applied. And the third paper is of descriptive type questions based on the selected subject by candidate.

 Relevant portion of the advertisement reads as follows:

“A candidate who does not appear in Paper­ I will not be permitted to appear in Paper­ II and Paper­ III. Paper III will be evaluated only for those candidates who are able to secure the minimum qualifying marks in paper I and II as per the table given below.

Manoj obtained50% marks in Papers I and II but he did not do as well in Paper III.  The JPSC fixed a cut off percentage of 60 for Paper III which the writ petitioner did not.attain and as such he was declared not successful and, therefore, ineligible to be considered for appointment as lecturer.

Aggrieved by the said action, the writ petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court which allowed the same.The appeal filed by the JPSC before the writ court was also allowed mainly on the ground that the Public Service Commission could not have fixed qualifying marks of 60% and this amounted to changing the rules of the game after the advertisement had been issued and process of selection had started.  It held that once the candidate had obtained 50% marks, the candidate could not be disqualified and the JPSC was not bound by the instructions of the UGC in this regard.The High Court also directed that the case of the writ petitioner would be considered on the basis of performance.The High Court held that no cut off marks had been provided for Paper III.

The scheme framed by the UGC has a provision for constitution   of   a   moderation   committee   which   will   help   in deciding   the   cut   off   marks   in   each   subject   for   declaring   the result.

JPSE said that   the   moderation   committee, keeping in view the various factors, decides what should be the cut off  marks in  each subject and  this  does not  have  to  be decided at the stage of issuance of advertisement. The advertisement does not 4 envisage any minimum cut­off marks for Paper III. Both sides have challenged the judgment of the High Court and we are deciding both the appeals by this common judgment.

HELD:

The Supreme Court said that, Clause 4 of the scheme clearly states that  the   moderation   committee   has   been   constituted   only   for   the purpose   of   deciding   the   cut­off   marks   in   each   subject   for declaring the result.  The advertisement clearly indicates that only those candidates who obtained 50%(for general/OBC) marks in Paper I and II would be eligible to take the test in Paper III.

That   need   will   arise   only   when   the   moderation committee   meets   and   decides   what   should   be   the   level   of competence expected from the people who are to be considered for appointment as Lecturers.It is for the moderation committee to decide what should be the cut­off marks.

There could be the subject where all the people who qualified Paper I and II get very low marks in Paper III and the moderation committee may be justified   in  prescribing   lower qualifying standards.  On the other hand, there may be a subject where   there   are   many   candidates   who   do   extremely   well   in Paper   III   and   the   moderation   committee   may   decide   to   fix   a higher standard. The constitution of a moderation committee is normally done only to do this sort of moderation.

The High Court erred in holding that the JPSC could not fix the minimum marks for Paper III.  Hence, we set aside the judgment of the High Court dated 09.11.2016.  The Civil Appeal No. 9441 6 of 2019 filed by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission is allowed and Civil.Appeal. No. 9442 of 2019 filed by the other side (writ petitioner) is dismissed.