NIRMALJIT KAUR,J. - (1.) The petitioner has challenged the action of respondents in fixing the minimum qualifying marks for the interview for appointment to the post of Assistant Administrative officer.
(2.) It is not disputed that advertisement dated 15.12.2015 prescribed minimum qualifying marks for the interview. The petitioner is, however, aggrieved that the said minimum qualifying marks were left to be decided by the respondents after the interview was over. The minimum qualifying marks finally laid down as 30% is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Hemani Malhotra v. High Court of Delhi reported in AIR 2008 SCW 3205 as well as Ashok alias Somanna Gowda and another v. State of Karnataka by its Chief Secretary and others reported in (1992) 1 Supreme Court Cases 28.
(3.) As per the reply, the cut off marks for interview are decided before the initiation of the recruitment process and is, accordingly, informed to the Interview Committee members before the time of interview. The qualifying marks for interview were fixed by the Corporation on 18.01.2013 itself at the time of 27th Batch of the Assistant Administrative Officer (AAO) Recruitment and the same qualifying cut off marks for interview for eligibility for final selection maintained in the current recruitment of 29th Batch of AAO in the year 2015.;