MUNINDRA KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. versus RAJIV GOVIL AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 812 · Decided: 10-05-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.M. KASLIWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
A 
B 
c 
MUNINDRA KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. 
V. 
RAJIV GOVIL AND ORS. ETC. 
MAY 10, 1991 
[N.M. KASLIWAL AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 14-Selection for the post of 
Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the U.P. State Electricity Board-Allo-
cation of 40 marks for interview and 40 marks for group discussion-As 
against 120 marks for Written Examination-Whether arbitrary-
Whether violative of. 
Civil Services: U.P. State Electricity Board-Assistant Engineers 
( Civil)-Selection-Allocation of marks-As against 120 marks for 
Written Test, 40 marks for interview and 40 marks for group discus-
sion-Whether arbitrary-Selection made on such basis-Whether 
D 
vitiated-Method of group discussion along with interview-Desirabi-
lity and legality of-Ideal marks to be allocated for interview and group 
discussion-Stipulated. 
For filling up the posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil), the U.P. 
State Electricity Board issued an advertisement calling for applications. 
E 
As per the Scheme of Examination, 120 marks were allocated for Writ-
ten Test and 40 marks each were allocated for Interview and group 
discussion. By following the said procedure the Board selected the 
successful candidates and appointed them. 
Three unsuccessful candidates filed Writ Petitions before the High 
F 
Court. They contended that the marks allocated for Interview and 
group discussion were on the higher side and as such the entire selection 
stood vitiated and was liable to be quashed. 
Accepting the contentions, the High Court quashed the entire 
slection. Aggrieved by the High Court's order. the appellants who 
G 
were seleeted and appointed as Assistant Engineers (Civil) preferred the 
present appeals, by special leave. 
Allowing the appeals in part this Court, 
HELD: I. The rule made by the U.P. State Electricity Board 
H 
keeping 40 marks for Interview and 40 marks for group discussions is 
812 
y 
)-
y 
\ 
' 
MUNINDRA KUMAR v. RAJIV ·GOVIL 
813 
arbitrary and is quashed. In future the marks for interview and group 
discussion shall not be kept exceeding 10% and 5% respectively of the 
total marks. However, the election already made by the Board for the 
posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil) shall not be disturbed. 1820A-B) 
2. It cannot be held that the method of group discussion along 
with interview for selection of Assistant Engineers by the Board is in 
any manner wrong, illegal or unconstitutional. It is in vogue in the 
Board since 1979 and it lies in the wisdom of the Board to keep the 
method of group discussion as an aid to interview for selection of 
Assistant Engineers fa future or not. l818A] 
3. Group discussion is a mode of selection in aid. of interview in 
order to assess the personality of the candidate and determine his/her 
suitability to the job in hand. In the case of an interview or oral viva 
voce it is restricted to a single candidate at a time while in the case of 
group discussion it takes place among a group of candidatesthemselves. 
Generally, candidates of same age level, similar educational qualifica-
tions, experience and environmental background are grouped together 
and asked to discuss a subject. The purpose of group discussion is to 
assess the qualities, mental alertness, manner of asserting oneself, 
shilwing regard for opinion of others, ability to discuss a subject with-
out losing temper and his initiative, tact and self confidence when con-
fronted with a problem facing a large number of people. In group 
discussion the examiner observes the candidates from behind and 
makes his own assessment and as such the allotment of marks for group 
discussion cannot be equated with the marks allotted for interview. In 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
the interview every candidate gets a chance and the members of the 
interviewing board can in a better manner judge the intelligence, ability 
and personality of the candidate to determine his suitability for the job. 
The marks for group discussion cannot be kept at an equal pedestal 
F 
with the interview. However, the group discussion as one of the 
methods for assessing the suitability of a candidate for the post of 
Assistant ·Engineer has not been kept by any other State Electricity 
Board in India except the Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh Electri-
city Boards. Taking into attOUDt all aspects' of the matter and the 
procedure adopted at variou5 examinations, it is lit and proper that 15 G 
per cent marks in all are to be kept for interview, and if the rule makin
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.