- (1.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners is challenging the non -selection of the present petitioners by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission as a Lecturer. In pursuance of the public advertisement dated 31st January, 2007, the petitioners appeared in the interview/viva -voce test and, thereafter, they were evaluated by the Interviewing Committee and looking to the over all performance of the present petitioners, the marks were allotted and were arranged in seriatim. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that fixation of 40% marks for the viva -voce test is an arbitrary action and, therefore, the selection process of the respondents deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, who has submitted that in pursuance of Section 57 (2) (b) of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000, the prescribed procedure has been followed by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, which is only the viva -voce test. Interviewing Committee was appointed by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission and the candidates' interviews were taken including of the present petitioners. Marks were allotted by the Interviewing Committee to the present petitioners and other candidates and, thereafter, the petitioners were arranged in seriatim. Looking to the marks of the present petitioners, the petitioners are not selected for the post of Lecturers and, therefore, the petitioners are now challenging the allotment of 40% marks for the viva -voce test and 60% for educational qualification. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the Jharkhand Public Service Commission that this issue has already been decided by this Court vide order dated 20th March, 2009 in W.P. (C) No. 270 of 2008 and it has been held by this Court that there is no procedural illegality in fixing 40% marks for viva -voce test for the selection of the Lecturers, in pursuance of public advertisement dated 31st January, 2007. The detailed judgment has been delivered by this Court referring all the earlier judgments relevant to the facts of the case and applicable to the candidates in the aforesaid order and, therefore, the petitions deserve to be dismissed. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case especially Section 57 (2) (b) of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000 and looking to the public advertisement dated 31st January, 2007 as well as looking to the publication in the daily newspaper on 16th March, 2007 and also looking to the several judgments referred in the decision rendered by this Court dated 20th March, 2009 in W.P. (C) No. 270 of 2008, there is no procedural irregularity or illegality in the selection process of the candidates for the post of Lecturers. Allocation of marks for viva -voce test can not be labelled as an arbitrary, capricious or malafide because there is no written test held in the present case because it is not required statutorily under Section 57 of the Act, 2000. When the Lecturers are to be appointed, their educational qualifications etc. are to be properly appreciated and, therefore, 60% marks are allotted to the educational qualification, and the educational achievements, but, it may happen that some candidates might have studied a part of the syllabus. Likewise part of a new syllabus might not have studied at all by those candidates. Therefore, to check their knowledge about the newly added syllabus, 40% of the marks have been allotted to the vivavoce test, can not be said to be an arbitrary action, on the contrary, there is a valid and convincing logic for fixing 40% marks for viva -voce test. Whenever the Jharkhand Public Service Commission is selecting a candidate, all care ought to have been taken by the Commission so that a candidate is having a full knowledge of the latest syllabus of a particular faculty, may be selected, otherwise, if 100% are to be allotted for educational qualification, there are all chances for selection of those candidates, who have never studied the new syllabus, but, have secured higher marks during their graduation or post graduation study and they will be selected, but, that is not a correct or healthy method of a selection and, therefore, rightly the weightage has been given by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission to evaluate a candidate from the view point of knowledge of latest syllabus.
(3.) THERE is also one more reason for allotment of 40% marks for the viva -voce test. A cardinal principle for taking viva -voce test is to check the suitability of the candidate for the relevant post. Higher percentage of marks during graduation or post graduation sometimes is not helpful for the appointment on the post. Academic qualification is not the sole criteria. Whether the candidate is promptly giving answer or not, what type of behaviour the candidate is having, what is the temperament of the candidate, especially when cornered questions are asked, tolerance power of the candidate and promptness and presence of mind and such other abilities will be checked in viva -voce test and, therefore, oral interview and its fixation of marks of 40% in the facts of the present case can not be labelled as an arbitrary action.;