Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Navnit Prakash, learned A.C. to S.C.-III for the State and Mr. Sanjay Piparwall, learned counsel appearing for the J.P.S.C.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to advertisement no. 13 of 2008 which was published for appointment on the post of Civil Judge, Junior Division (Munsif), the petitioner applied for the post. The petitioner was declared successful in preliminary examination and in the mains examination also. However, after the final examination viva voce was conducted and final result was published, but, the name of the petitioner was not there.
(3.) The petitioner was applied for information under the RTI before the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (J.P.S.C.) whereby it was informed to the petitioner that the petitioner has got 82 marks in mains and 8 marks in interview i.e. total 90 marks. The main contention of arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the viva voce total marks was fixed as 20 marks which is not in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mohinder Sain Garg Vs. State of Punjab & Ors, 1991 1 SCC 662. He referred paragraph 33 of the said judgment which is extracted herein below: "33. In our view Ashok Kumar Yadav case clinches the issues raised before us and being a decision given by four Judges is also binding on us. That was a case relating to public employment and a direction was given to all the Public Service Commissions to follow the marks allocated for viva voce test as done by the UPSC which was 12.2 per cent of the total marks. Ashok Kumar Yadav case was decided in 1985 and we fail to understand as to why the State of Punjab did not follow the same for making selections in 1989 for the posts of Excise and Taxation Inspectors. It is no doubt correct that the selection of Taxation and Excise Inspectors is done by a subordinate selection body and not by Public Service Commission yet no valid reason has been given before us by learned counsel for the respondents as to why the principle enunciated in Ashok Kumar Yadav case should not be applied in these cases as well. Even if Ashok Kumar Yadav case may not in terms apply in the cases before us to the extent of laying down 12.2 per cent of the total marks for viva voce test which was made applicable for selections to be made by UPSC, we deem it proper to lay down after taking in view the dictum of all the authorities decided so far that the percentage of viva voce test in the present cases at 25 per cent of the total marks is arbitrary and excessive. There could be no gainsaying that viva voce test cannot be totally dispensed with, but taking note of the situation and conditions prevailing in our country, it would not be reasonable to have the percentage of viva voce marks more than 15 per cent of the total marks in the selection of candidates fresh from college/school for public employment by direct recruitment where the rules provided for a composite process of selection namely written examination and interview.";