ANZAR AHMED versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 434 · Decided: 28-10-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH, S.C. AGRAWAL

cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

.• 
A 
ANZARAHMED 
v. 
ST ATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
OCTOBER 28, 1993 
B 
[KULDIP SINGH AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.) 
Service Law : 
Bihar State Medical Service-Selection-Unani Medical Officer-No 
C separate rules framed-Public Service Commission following consistent past 
practice-Giving 50% marks for academic achievement and 50% marks for 
interview-Whether amounts to taking policy decision-Procedure fol-
lowed-Whether arbitrary and vitiates the selection. 
D 
Administrative Law-l'olicy decision-COnsistent past practice-Fol-
lowing of-Whether amounts to taking policy decision. 
The Respondent State Government sent a requisition to the State 
Public Service Commission for selection to the 22 vacant posts or Unani 
Medical Officers which were declared Gazetted Class-II. The requisition 
E stated that the procedure or appointment would be the same as applicable 
to the incumbents or the State Service cadre. The Commission wrote to the 
Government that appointment to State Medical Service was done on the 
basis or competitive examination and so competitive examination for ap· 
pointment to the post or Unani Medical Officers could be held after the 
F relevant rules were made. The State Government replied that in the 
absence or rules the selection may be made on the basis of interview. It was 
also intimated that selection be made for 81 posts, instead of 22 as 
requested earlier. 
The Public Senice Commission advertised the posts and the ap· 
G plicants appeared for interview before two Boards presided by two mem· 
bers of the Commission.100 marks were allotted for viva voce test and 100 
marks for academic performance. 55 candidates were recommended for 
appointment. This was challenged in a writ petition filed before the High 
Court by two or the Respondents and during the pendency of the writ 
H petition, the selected candidates were appointed. 
' 
434 
.. 
AHMED v. STA TE 
435 
The High Court <1uashed the recommendation of the Commission. A 
It held that the question as to how much marks should be set apart or 
allocated for the viva voce vis-a-vis the marks for the academic qualifica-
tions related to a policy matter which went to the root of the recruitment 
process and a decision on the question could have been taken only by the 
Commission, i.e., the whole body, and not by the members comprising the 
interview Boards or the Chairman individually. It also held that a~location B 
of 50 per cent marks for viva voce was unjustified and arbitrary. Hence 
these appeals. 
On behalf of the Respondent Commission it was contended that 
since the recommendation was to be made only on the basis of interview C 
the consistent past practice was followed viz. 50% marks for academic 
achievement and 50% marks for viva voce. 
Allowing the appeals, this Court 
HELD : 1.1. The consistent practice that has been followed by the D 
Respondent Public Service Com~ission when selection is made on the 
basis of interview only is to allocate 50% marks for academic achievement 
and 50% marks for interview. This allocation was made by the Commission 
in the earlier selection also for the post of Unani Medical Officer. Since 
the selection in the present case was also to be made only on the basis of E 
interview, as indicated by the State Government the practice which was 
being followed in the past \V3S followed in this selection also and there was 
no need for the Commission to take a fresh decision for allocation of 
marks for this selection. It cannot, therefore, be said that the allocation of 
50% marks for viva voce/interview for the selection has not been made by 
the Commission but was made by the members who headed the Interview F 
Boards or by the Chairman individually. The High Court was, therefore, 
not justified in holding that the selection was vitiated on account of failure 
on the part of the Commission to decide the matter or allocation or marks 
for viva voce vis-a-vis academic qualifications. [439-G-H, 440-A-C] 
1.2. The State Government in its letter dated September 20, 1990 has G 
clearly stated that selection should be made on the basis of interview. On 
the basis of this letter the Commission could have made the selection 
wholly on the basis of marks obtained at the interview. But in accordance 
with the past practice, the Commission has made the selection on the basis 
of interview while keeping in view the academic performance and with that H 
436 . 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A end in view the Commission 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.