LexSUKHMANDER SINGH AND ORS ETC. versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 98 : 2024 INSC 736 Sukhmander Singh and Ors Etc. v. The State of Punjab and Ors Etc. (Civil Appeal No(s). 1511-1513 of 2021) 11 September 2024 [Hrishikesh Roy,* Sudhanshu Dhulia and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose as to whether the criteria on the basis of which selection was made could be made the legal basis for selection and appointment of Laboratory Attendants. Headnotes† Service law – Selection/appointment – Post of laboratory attendents – Selection process for 31 vacancies – 1,952 candidates shortlisted for interview after the written test – Publication of final select list – Challenge to, by the unsuccessful candidates – Single Judge annulled the selection process observing that the process was irregular and lacked transparency – However, the Division Bench held that the selection process was not mala fide or biased, a fresh list should be compiled by the Board, deducting 5 marks previously awarded to candidates belonging to rural areas – Sustainability: Held: In a recruitment process where there are only 31 posts up for grabs, subjecting an excessively large number of candidates, 63 times the number of vacancies to the interview stage, would inevitably lead to a situation where even those candidates, who may have performed very poorly in the written test, are granted an unfair shot at appointment and many more qualified candidates are potentially overlooked – Thus, limiting the number of candidates for the viva voce segment becomes essential for several reasons – It enhances the efficiency of the selection process by providing for a more thorough and fair evaluation of each candidate – By restricting the number of candidates, the process becomes more transparent and less susceptible to allegations of favouritism or bias – Thus, it ensures that only the most qualified candidates, based on an objective criterion, proceed to the stage of * Author [2024] 10 S.C.R. 99 Sukhmander Singh and Ors Etc. v. The State of Punjab and Ors Etc. an interview, helping maintain the integrity of the process, upholding principles of meritocracy and reducing chances of oversight – Impugned judgment can be sustained only to the limited extent of eliminating marks awarded for the rural area criteria – Thus, the direction given by the Single Judge to commence the selection from the stage of written test, upheld – Candidates only up to five times the number of vacancies to be permitted to appear in the next segment of the recruitment test-interview – Candidates should be evaluated on a total of 100 marks, of which 50 marks would be awarded on the basis of a written examination – From the balance, 20 marks should be awarded on the basis of the candidate’s performance in an interview, 15 marks on the basis of knowledge of scientific practical equipment, 10 marks on the basis of academic qualifications and 5 marks on the basis of experience – Waiting list of 10 beyond the 31 notified vacancies to be prepared, if any vacancy remains unfilled from amongst the 31 in order of merit in the list, those vacancies can be filled up in order of merit from the waitlisted candidates – Thus, fresh selection exercise to be carried out in terms of the said directions. [Paras 17-20, 23-25] Case Law Cited Abhishek Rishi v. State of Punjab & Ors. (2013) SCC OnLine P&H 6980 – referred to. List of Keywords Selection; Selection and appointment of Laboratory Attendants; Interview stage; Efficiency of selection process; Fair evaluation; Integrity of the process; Principles of meritocracy; Chances of oversight; Elimination of marks awarded for rural area criteria; Written test. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 1511-1513 of 2021 From the Judgment and Order dated 20.07.2016 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in LPA No. 1381 and 856 of 2014 and LPA No. 804 of 2015 With Civil Appeal No. 1514 of 2021 100 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports Appearances for Parties Sanjoy Ghosh, Sr. Adv., Vijay Kasana, Mrs. Chetna Singh, Chirag Verma, Ankit Kumar, Ashish Tanwar, Mrs. Smita Bankoti, Devendra Singh, Ashish Sheoran, Karan Thakur, Ms. Diva Singh, Shubhranshu Padhi, Advs. for the Appellants. Avishkar Singhvi, Siddhant Sharma, Akash Alex, Praful Bhardwaj, P.S. Khurana, Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Ram Naresh Yadav, Nitin Bhardwaj, Himanshu Sharma, Ram Niwas Sharma, Sandeep Singh, Mrs. Aditi Sharma, Arun Kumar, Loke
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.