K. MANJUSREE versus STATE OF AP. & ANR.

Citation: [2008] 2 S.C.R. 1025 · Decided: 15-02-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 17 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 2 S.C.R. 1025 
K. MANJUSREE 
A 
II. 
STATE OF AP. & ANR. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1313 of 2008) 
FEBRUARY 15, 2008 
B 
(K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ., R.V. RAVEENDRAN 
" 
AND J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.) 
Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service : 
Appointment to posts of District and Sessions Judge c 
(Grade-II) - By direct recruitment - Allocation for marks for 
written examination and interview - Change in criteria after 
commencement/completion of selection process - Legality 
of - HELD: Authority making rules regulating the selection, 
can prescribe, by rules, the minimum marks both for written D 
..,..-1 
examination and interview or may not prescribe any minimum 
marks either for written examination and/or interview - Where 
rules do not prescribe any procedure, Selection Committee 
may also prescribe such minimum marks, but it should do so 
before commencement of selection process - Changing E 
criteria after completion of selection process would be illegal 
- On facts, when Administrative Committee of High Court had 
clearly resolved on 30.11.2004 that evaluation of performance 
should be with reference to 75 marks for written examination 
-
--:~ 
and 25 marks for interview and minimum qualifying marks for F 
various categories would be 'as prescribed earlier', conducting 
written examination with reference to 100 marks, and 
prescribing minimum qualifying marks for interview, which 
criterion was not there in the earlier selection and which was 
introduced after entire selection process was completed, would G 
amount to changing the criteria during the selection process 
'> 
or thereafter, which is clearly impermissible and illegal - High 
Court would redraw merit list by scaling down written 
examination marks to 75 from 100 and without applying any 
1025 
H 
1026 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 
A minimum marks for interview - Andhra Pradesh State Higher 
Judicial Service Rules, 1958. 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 13q - Petition for special leave to appeal - HELD: 
B Is not maintainable as the petitioner is not aggrieved by the 
selection process nor did she file any writ petition in the High 
Court - The SLP is also liable to be rejected on the ground of 
delay. 
In the State of Andhra Pradesh 1 O posts of District 
C and Sessions Judge (Grade-II) to be filled in by direct 
recruitment were advertised on 28.5.2004. The 
qualification for the post was prescribed in the Andhra 
Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1958. The 
matter and method of selection was to be decided by the 
D · High Court. The Administrative Committee of the High 
Court, exercising its powers under the Standing Orders 
of the High Court, by a resolution dated 30.11.2004, 
prescribed the method and manner of selection. It 
resolved to conduct the written examination for 75 marks 
E and o·r,al examination for 25 marks: It also resolved that 
the minimum qualifying marks for various cat·egories 
wou.ld be. 'as prescribed earlier'. However, after the 
examination, merit lists of the candidates for different 
categories were prepared on the basis of a total of 125 
F marks which included 100 for written examination and 25 
marks for interview. Accordingly, the interview Committee 
(ecommended 10 candidates under various categories. 
1fMl f'dministrative Committee approved the selection list. 
TJle Full Court by its minutes dated 6.4.2006 impliedly 
G approved the resolution dated 30.11.2004 but did not agree .... 
with the selection list. Thereafter, a sub-Committee 
prepared a fresh selection list after proporttonate.. 
recalculation of marks, scaling down the marks obta.ini:ld 
by the candidates in t.he written examination with 
H reference to a total of 100 to 75 and by adding the interview 
+-
K. MANJUSREE v. STATE OF AP. & ANR. 
1027 
~ 
marks obtained out of 25 marks. The sub-Committe(;! also A 
opined that the criterion of minimum qualifying marks for 
written examination should also· be applied for minimum 
marks in interview. Since the minimum percentage to pass 
the written examination was 50% for open category, 40% 
for backward classes and .35.% for ·SC and ST categories, 
B 
the same corresponding percentage was fixed for 
·1' 
respective categories for the interview. On that basis, only 
9 .candidates were recommended for selection, as the 
marks obtained in the interview by the only woman 
candidate in S~ category fell below the minimum c 
qualifying percentage. The second list contained the 
names of 5 out of

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