NAYAK PNO NO.980510777 RAJ BAHADUR & ORS. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 7 S.C.R. 868 · Decided: 09-05-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
868
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 7 S.C.R.
LANCE NAYAK PNO NO.980510777 RAJ BAHADUR & ORS.
v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 4837 of 2019)
MAY 09, 2019
[UDAY UMESH LALIT AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Service Law – Appellants belonging to Scheduled Caste
category were posted as Constables/Head Constables in the Police
Department of Uttar Pradesh – They appeared in the limited
departmental examination held for filling up the posts of Sub-
Inspector (Civil Police) – Conduct of examination was to be
governed by 2008 Rules – Candidates were required to appear in
the written examination carrying 300 marks–Written examination
comprised of four subjects (2 papers of 100 marks and 2 of 50
marks each) and the candidate who failed to obtain minimum 50
marks in each subject would not be eligible for promotion – In
challenge to the examination on the ground that 18 questions were
set in erroneous manner, Single Judge directed the authorities to
award full marks to every candidate in respect of those 18 questions–
Order stayed by the Division Bench – Supreme Court issued certain
directions – Select list was published thereafter – In another SLP,
Supreme Court vide order dtd. 10.08.15 directed that no court shall
entertain any grievance relating to this particular selection – Writ
petition filed by the appellants submitting inter alia that while
considering 50 per cent cut off marks, criteria must be “paper”
wise and not “subject” wise– In view of the order of Supreme Court
dtd. 10.08.15, the High Court dismissed the writ petition – Plea of
the appellants that subject nos.3 & 4 of 50 marks each are part of
the same paper and the appellants have secured 54% in the paper
though may not have secured 50% in subject nos.3 & 4, thus on the
strenght of the aggregate from all the subjects, they would be entitled
to be promoted – Held: Fact that the appellants had not obtained
50 per cent marks in each of the subjects is accepted – Present
matters concern limited Departmental examination where the idea
is, regardless of seniority levels, a meritorious candidate be given
chance to reach higher levels – Merit is therefore the key element
and there can be no compromise and dilution of the criteria – What
   [2019] 7 S.C.R. 868
868
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
869
is required in terms of the Rules is minimum of 50 per cent marks
“in each subject” – Subjects are delineated in the Rules and there
are four subjects – Irrespective whether subjects 3 and 4 form part
of the same paper, the express language of the Rules does not permit
any such interpretation and the construction as suggested by the
appellants cannot be accepted – Uttar Pradesh Sub-Inspector and
Inspector (Civil Police) Service Rules, 2008 – r.16.
Disposing of the matters, the Court
HELD : CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4837 OF 2019
1.1 The fact that the appellants had not obtained 50 per
cent marks in each of the subjects is accepted. In these matters
with limited Departmental examination where the idea is,
regardless of seniority levels, a meritorious candidate be given
chance to reach higher levels. Merit is therefore the key element
and there can be no compromise and dilution of the criteria. What
is required in terms of the Uttar Pradesh Sub-Inspector and
Inspector (Civil Police) Service Rules, 2008 is minimum of 50
per cent marks “in each subject”. The subjects are delineated in
the Rules and there are four subjects.  Irrespective whether
subjects 3 and 4 form part of the same paper, the express language
of the Rules does not permit any such interpretation and the
construction suggested by the appellants cannot be accepted.
The reliance placed on the order passed by Supreme Court in
Writ Petition (c) No. 45 of 2016 is also completely misplaced.
The order by itself did not decide any controversy and as a matter
of fact it was observed that the order would not automatically
operate as a precedent for other cases. Therefore, the submission
is rejected. [Paras 12-15] [877-D-H; 878-A]
CIVIL APPEAL NOs.4838-4839 OF 2019; CIVIL APPEAL
Nos.4840-4842 OF 2019; CIVIL APPEAL NO.4845 OF 2019
1.2 The issues involved in the matters being identical to
the earlier matter where similar contentions were raised, no
reason to interfere.  [Para 18] [878-D]
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4844 OF 2019; CIVIL APPEAL
NO.4846 OF 2019; CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 4843 OF 2019
1.3 The criteria under the Rules is minimum of 50 per cent
marks in each of the subjects.  It was open to the State to have
LANCE NAYAK PNO NO.980510777 RAJ B

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