 Again, we are with the part 3 of our service law series, wherein Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal, as we always say, akin to his name that he's knowledge on service law and all other fields, speaks volume that his sessions on the YouTube have made it special place and in the hearts of the people who actually want to understand service law. The service being provided by Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal to the nation at large for empowering with the legal knowledge is also which will go down deep in the history for that particular. Understanding service law always for a common man who's practicing in the field of law or student always has its own challenges. But if you can get the blocks unblocked by a person of the nature of Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal shows that you can understand today's session we take forward with the recruitment process, weightage, considerations and safeguards. We can all say that once we heard the session from Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal and we can be guarded in the court of law once you are as a lawyer or itself or a respondent group because you can understand the pros and cons. The weightage in your arguments always get better, your weightage of the knowledge definitely gets better and you can be recruited in the new domains and new eras of knowledge when Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal is there. Being a weekend and that too when he has a schedule ahead still his desire getting the knowledge be yes neither impressed but we can only say that we are always his knowledge. Over to you Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal. Yes sir. Thank you. I am back all of you with chapter 3 that is dealing with process of recruitment and weightages that can be assigned to various tools of assessing suitability then what is meant by consideration of candidates gotten from the constitutional scheme and in case of any violation of individual rights or for that matter even collective rights of the candidates in a recruitment process what are the safeguards that are available. By now it must have been very clear to every one of you that any recruitment employment will have to be informed by the bedrock requirements of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India. When I say articles 16 and do not specify any clause thereof it obviously means the recruitment process will have to be in conformity with even the rules regarding reservation both as regards quanta and also regards the manner in which the reservation is provided. Now what is this recruitment where it starts and where it ends on this aspect we should be very clear if you refer to any leading judgment and to find mean means enlistment and it commences with issue of advertisement or employment modification inviting applications and ends with publication of the select list and it is forward to the appointing. One minute kindly check your internet probably there's some buffering just last gen to do that meanwhile you can continue okay because there's a lack of the way you speak there's a breakage yeah now I think now it should be clear there was some problem with the internet and but not but it is better to not go by that definition which is legally correct but conceptually may not be complete first requirement for initiation of recruitment processes existence of vacancies and more importantly the decision of the appointing authority to fill up the required number of posts therefore though we can call it as a step prior to recruitment technically in substance the first step in recruitment is the decision taken by the appointing authority to identify the number of vacant posts and after those vacant posts decision of the appointing authority to fill up the required number or specified number of posts once this exercise is completed or decision is taken with the appointing authority then the locate from appointing authority to the selecting body in most of these recruitment rules we find a provision as to who shall make the recruitment which agency shall make the recruitment for that if it is a body within the employer organization they may say that selection committee or in most of this concerning the government service there will be a specification as to the agency which will conduct the recruitment commonly it will be public service commission or in some states for some categories of posts we also have staff selection commissions or staff selection boards that will be selection boards as the same function namely recruitment after the decision is taken by the appointing authority and the vacancies are entered straight to the recruiting body the first requirement step to be taken by the recruiting body is issuance of advertisement or what is commonly known as recruitment notification it is settled that if constitutional value of equal opportunity in public employment has to be fulfilled any appoint even if it is temporary or at half it will have to be made only after providing opportunity to all eligible candidates to compete if they so desire therefore first essential requirement of any recruitment process is issuance of the recruitment notification what is the recruitment notification spirit significance because it is more or less settled that any condition which is not stipulated in the recruitment notification cannot be insisted upon and there is one more requirement that is the recruitment notification must be strict must be in strict compliance with the requirements of the recruitment keeping these two safeguards in mind or essentialities in mind what a recruitment notification should contain recruitment notification of course should contain number of posts nature of the post nature of appointments whether it is temporarily tenure based or permanent and the qualifications stipulated for the post qualifications are of two types one qualification is academic qualification that is a graduate in any branch of a study from a recognized university or a particular technical or professional qualification like l l b b e or b architecture or mvps or ms then any particular standard of academic attention for example in this post of a student professor in any university or college minimum prescribed is 55% in the post graduate course of the relevant subject this will have to be clearly mentioned how many years of teaching experience if it is a post in teaching line or workshop experience if it is a technical post or working experience or administrative experience as the case may be the experience requirement also will have to be mentioned then we have age requirement what should be the minimum age and what should be the maximum age of course these days we are we are having posts for which there is no maximum age requirement as far as example if you take the regulations for minimum standards in teaching in the graduate and post graduate courses or even medical council norms there is no maximum age limit because of two things one is they require teaching experience therefore higher age higher the higher the teaching experience it would be in public interest not to stipulate any higher age but it goes without saying that nobody who has crossed the age of retirement can still compete for the minimum and maximum we have the power of relaxation in most of the governmental rules or even in professional college rules you will find the a provision for relaxation of certain qualifications what are the relaxations for say there is what is what there are two types of experiences when it comes to appointments of teaching staff in university one is research experience another is the teaching experience one aspect of like relaxation would arise that is where let us say PhD in the relevant subject is the stipulated qualification there would be a relaxation where though has no though a candidate has not acquired a formal PhD degree he might have published work of such a high standard which in the opinion of an expert body may entail him to have the degree doctorate degree relaxation another type of relaxation is to ensure mobility of employer employees from one public organization to another public organization normally there will be a provision in the service rules that to the extent of service render in a analogous post in any other public sectoral organization maximum age relaxable maximum will be relaxable by the number of years of service up to a maximum of a particular number of years this is age relaxations relaxation can be of immediate variety but the basic requirement is that if there is power of relaxation available in the service rules it should be stated so in the in the recruitment verification and it can be specified as to what are the relaxations available what is the extent of relaxations available what are the conditions subject to which the relaxation to be available and who is the authority competent to decide the extent and applicability of relaxation relaxation must be available in the recruitment group and it must also be stated in the recruitment group there are any number of judgments which say that relaxation will have to be strictly in accordance with the recruitment group and relaxation if available to the extent the extent of availability must be clearly spent out in the advertisement the requirement of spelling it out in the advertisement is that object of any recruitment is to have the best candidate available and offering his candidate to be selected if relaxation norm is not made known some of the candidates for eligible for relaxation may not apply for the post looking to the requirements in the advertisement therefore that is another aspect and why it is very necessary to state every requirement of the relaxation has also the recruitment rule in the notification is that there are two essentialities to be complied with in any recruitment to public force first requirement is it must be in consonance with the recruitment rules second requirement is once the process of recruitment stops or as they say once the game starts the rules of the game cannot be changed therefore the advertisement must be complete and it should contain all essential data or all essential information to enable every competing candidate have an equal opportunity then it should also stipulate what is the last date for submission of applications these days there is one more requirement because most of the recruiting bodies insist on submission of applications online therefore candidate is expected to know is required to know not only the date on the last date on which he can submit the application but also the first date from which the application will be available on the website for download these are the essential requirements of the advertisement there is one more requirement that is all right we stipulate he must be a holder of phd or equivalent he must be not more than 35 years of age he must be in case he wants to climb reservation he should obtain the can there is one other aspect that requires to be stipulated that is the relevant date with reference to which the eligibility will be computed that is suppose on 1st of May I don't want the 1st of May because though it is beginning of any financial or accounting year let us not because these days a common complaint is that all these recruitment exercises are filling exercises therefore I don't want to add to that opinion by choosing 1st April as the relevant date let us say 1st of May is the date on which the advertisement issued the issue last date for stipulate for submission of the application is let me presume it is 31st of May the notification should say on what date the candidate should for the processing the qualifications this question arose in Rekha Chutulbe this case which arose from a recruitment conducted by Rajasthan units the recruitment notification did not specify the date with reference to which the polyp eligibility conditions have to be satisfied the selection committee had taken the eligibility date as date of conducting the intro or date of selection Suryam Bhat said it cannot be date of selection will always be uncertain nobody knows on what day the selection would take place therefore the definite date has to be prescribed for avoidance of arbitrariness and to ensure that every eligible candidate would be in a position to apply and it said if preferably notifications will stipulate the date if notification does not stipulate the date it is not that there is no date but the date would be last date prescribed for receipt of the applications therefore this if any advertisement does not mention the relevant date with reference to which the qualifications will eligibility will have to be ascertained that date it is not judicially settled will be the last date prescribed for the receipt of the applications and another important requirement of recruitment notification is what are the certificates that will have to be annexed to the application will also have to be stated many times this arises this question arises before the course what have what they what the usual complaint is that I could not get this certificate on time therefore I have submitted the application late but I had the qualification even earlier to the last date therefore my candidature has to be considered this question initially there was some confusion confusion in the sense in a case arising from admission to professional colleges in kerala let's see this is taken a view that possessing them for the qualification does not depend on possessing of the certificate or submission of the certificate therefore we have a pragmatic view and even if the certificates are produced after the last date stipulated for submission of applications they should have they they will have to be taken into consideration but over a period of time law slowly moved towards strict compliance with requirement of the recruitment notification because any concession or relaxation go to one would result in injustice to many others therefore in Vedanta look the Supreme court took the view that once a recruitment notification is issued and a time schedule is stipulated therein the recruitment will have to be completed in accordance with that stipulated time frame and it cannot undergo change and this applies to reservation certificates also in Vedanta look that the question involved was submission of disability certificate to climb reservation under equal opportunities for persons with disability side he is slightly discordant view was taken in Raj in Rajkumar Gijroya Rajkumar or what is Gijroya in Gijroya's case arising from the state of Delhi where the advertisement was way it did not stipulate that climb certificate for reservation has to be submitted along with the application but when publishing the select list the candidature of some persons who had to submit who had not enclosed the reservation submitted reservation certificate along with the application was rejected then Supreme court took a view invoking Rajkumar Gijroya's view in education law into service law and said that a liberal view has to be taken a candidate belonging to OBC will belong to OBC without certificate therefore the latest submission of certificate cannot be used by the candidate of course now subsequently two or three changements of the Supreme court have said the confusion not and said that Rajkumar Gijroya is limited to facts of that case and the law as it stands today is that any reservation certificate submitted after the stipulated date in the recruitment notification it can be taken in the latest case which allows from state of Bihar that concern submission of a certificate of B certificate that is Ramkumar Gijroya for the discordant that is a discordant view and then now the present view is state of Bihar versus Madhu Kanth Wajjal this was this was decided I think on 16th of December 2021 and therefore that view is the latest view and it is in line with the consistent view that is being taken with Supreme court in the matter of compliance with the terms of recruitment notifications and this would have any arbitrariness any manipulation any favoritism and it will ensure a level laying field now coming to the question of what are the tools to determine suitability of a candidate merit of a candidate who is company there are several tools one very simplistic view that can be taken the suppose a BA degree is stipulated as a qualification the merit of the candidates would already have been determined by the university by awarding marks or grades while awarding the BA degree take the percentage of marks of aggregate marks secured in the qualifying examination that is the degree examination of the concerned brand that is one very simplistic view but that cannot be a rational view for several reasons suppose in a state there are these days I think no state is having less than 20 universities suppose in a state there are about 20 or 25 universities awarding BA or BSA or B. each of those universities will have different standards each of them will be having different norms of evaluation therefore the even in the matter of admission to postgraduate courses in medicine supreme court said long years ago through justice Arsaila Hothi in Bhopal Tirthanis case suppose a qualifying examination is prescribed and there is more than one university in the state awarding that qualifying degree then to determine the merit of the candidates on a uniform basis we cannot go by the marks awarded with the university in the qualifying examination a written competitive examination is necessary that has been adopted in so far as service development systems are even earlier to talk about this therefore the most readily accepted pool of determination of merit is a competitive examination conducted by the reporting agency the next question would be whether written examination would be adequate or whether it can be the sole tool to determine the merit of a candidate when they are selecting a candidate for public service it is not the academic merit around that alone that we look at we look at various other components of his knowledge like current affairs general knowledge or what is called as transactional knowledge or the his being candidate being related to the present of a current affairs of the society several such components going to determine the suitability of a candidate some of them can be tested by written exam some cannot be tested by the written example so to assess the personality of a candidate this interview test has been introduced largely this is Chinapreti in Lila's case first propounded the advantages and disadvantages of various tools that are used in the recruitment process he said written examination is most commonly accepted but the deficiency of written examination is that it cannot best test the intellectual not the candidate but it does not judge the candidate himself or to use the words of consequences Chinapreti while written examination has the knowledge and capabilities of a candidate intellectually the interview test judges the candidates himself and he said for a effective recruitment that wine shall be there shall be both there could be both written examination and interview but interview is always suspect if you meet under as a matter of fact as advocates you would be coming across most of the times only unsuccessful candidates because it is unsuccessful candidates who sets the law in motion he is the person who challenges is not selection any one of them who comes to an advocate they say that sir I have been awarded very low marks in the interview I have secured 90 percent in the written examination sir person who has who was my batch mate in the university who is a dead according to me he has got more marks in the interview than me all these type of complaints to come but the solution lies in improving the credibility of the interview test rather than seeking to eradicate the interview as is being presently done by different state governments for I don't know what reasons but the balancing exercise is what is the percentage of weight that will be given to return to return test and to interview when this question comes always almost all the answers to the second date would lie upon Ashok Kumar Yadu where Ashok Kumar Yadu the supreme court said when there is both written examination and interview weightage of 33 percent of marks for interview appears to be on the year side it did not lay down in that application in that judgment any form of universal application and the other end specifically said there is no magic form law as to what would be the weightage for written examination what would be the weightage for interview it depends on the talent pool from which you are making the selection the lever of the post for which you are making the selection it also depends upon whether interview is used as a sole test or whether it is used as one of the tests in conjunction with other modes the in subsequent judgments this has been elaborated by saying suppose the report you even in Ashok Kumar itself even earlier in Ashok Kumar it was Justice Bhagavati who wrote the judgment for the first judgment on this interview weightages and of all that is in Lila that versus state of Ajarshan authored by that is it is a chin up ready that itself said suppose at the entry level we are recruiting candidates from universities fresh from the universe the ideal test to measure the merit of the candidate may be written examination coupled with a minority minor weightage for interview but let us say the case where we are recruiting candidates for the post-op processes candidates would always be matured more than 45 to 50 years of age they have enormous years of experience in such cases written test may be a harassment candidate and at the same time return after that harassment also written examination may not yield correct results therefore as we go up that interview could be either the sole test or the dominant test in a sticky color versus here in India the 40 percent weightage for interview was up subsequently in Andhra Pradesh state financial corporation where the interview was the sole test of measuring merit it was also having regard to the talent who and the level of the post for which the recruitment was being therefore the only certain answer I can give as to what is the extent of weightage that can be given for interview is it depends on the nature of candidates who are considering whom you are considering level of the post for which the selection is being made and the experience that the candidate would have gained by then and several other complex factors will have to go into it there is no magic percentage which would fix all the situations then consideration it has to be in accordance with that consider what is in accordance with law means in relation to recruitment recruitment rule is the law recruitment notification is the guidance and article 14 and article 16 or to be born in the mind which ensure that every candidate has a right to be considered in accordance with law he may not have a right to be appointed but every candidate has a right to be considered in accordance with law what is consideration in accordance with law apart from compliance with the recruitment is there must be no bias in any member of the selection committee now this is the concept which is difficult to be established but easy to be alleged but there are certain circumstances where bias is obvious the first case on this aspect of the matter that is about bias is the case of AK Kripak where the selection committee was meeting to select candidates for Indian forest service from the state forest service it was appointment by selection to the Indian forest service in that selection committee chief conservator of forest of the state is a member of the selection group in that case it so happened that the post of conservator of forest chief conservator was vacant and there was one in charge conservator of forest who himself was a candidate for selection to a year then what is required to be done what he did was he participated in the selection as a candidate he participated in interviewing the candidates for in respect of all other candidates except himself therefore the argument advanced was Naksha Bandhi may be a candidate he may be he might have interviewed all other considered all other candidates but he himself did not sit in the selection committee when his candidature supreme court said that all these arguments will not work and bias is obvious then number of times we come across cases where a relative of a candidate will sit in the selecting body therefore normally what these recruitment agencies do is that they will take a declaration from the examiners and the interview persons that none of their relationships close relatives are candidates in the process of recruitment classic case that arose in respect of this question of bias is again Ashok Kumar Yadav to which I have to go back in Ashok Kumar Yadav in a certain a relation of one of the members of the public service commission was a candidate the challenge of the selection was on the ground that one member of the select in body being a being on the principle of bias has let down the naked type of supreme court made a slight deviation there invoking the principle of the invoking the the object of necessity now what happens the public service commission is interested with the selection there are required to be a specified number of members of the commission interviewing the candidate if the members of the commission are disqualified from sitting in selection process on the ground that one or the other relative of them is participating in the selection process the whole thing becomes unworkable therefore the supreme court said when it comes to a body like public service commission it is not necessary for the member to refuse from the selection process itself all that is required to ensure not in such cases would be that number will not interview the candidate who is black he will be interviewed by other members of the commission who will not disclose the marks given to that particular candidate therefore the bias in selection is also subject to the doctrine of necessity which can be involved to work off the charge of bias or sometimes even breach of natural justice this is the proud principle then what are the safeguards in if the interview test is essential knowing as we do the arbitrary that could result in interview process I at least I know percent of the cases where interview becomes a sort of heart spreading candidate knows what was the cutoff point in the last selection candidate knows what are the marks secured by him in the written examination part of the competitive examination then the question would be how many marks he should get in the interview to get selected to work post this can result in whatever you call it heart-striding or name a label you may give as you please but the selection would not be fair and just as a safeguard the Supreme Court said that in fact it only adopted the alphabet file by the public service commission that marks secured in the written examination part is not disclosed to any member of the interview therefore the interview country members did not know what is the marks that candidate requires to get a particular question of course subsequently would have been amended in most of the states to the effect that marks shall not be disclosed even to the candidate himself and the publication of the final selection this is the principle followed by the UPSC which most of the state public service commission have now adopted then we come to the safeguards in law what are the safeguards if an appointment is made without issuing the advertiser it would be a still-borrowed baby in such cases to borrow the words of Larsim Keshav Majumdar even subsequent promotion confirmation whatever is granted to the candidate it would be like decorating a still-borrowed baby they will be of no constrictors a more moderate language has been deployed in state of Urisawasa Mamta Mahanty where it said suppose the candidate does not have eligibility qualifications or suppose an appointment is made without issuing an appointment advertisement or appointment has been made relaxing the impermissible in all such cases appointment itself is void of the issue and subsequent events do not sanctify that is if an appointment is bad at this threshold any number of years is spent on the post and any number of promotions he gets subsequent there too will be of no consequence and zero multiplied by zero will remain a zeal therefore the neither concept of adverse position nor long years of service would be useful to him then there is a oft-repeated principle that is participation in the selection process would disqualify the candidate from questioning the selection process or what we know what we call as estoppel by participation or acquisitions by participation it is true suppose your case is that a particular qualification could not have been stipulated the advertisement had stipulated their qualification or the advertisement was defective in the sense it did it gave certain confusing signals in such a case if you want to question it you have to question it at the threshold by participating in the selection process you are cuisine thereafter you will be stopped from questioning the selection process on the ground that you are not certain but at the same time there are cases and cases where the estoppel principle of estoppel cannot be it was stated in shikthi raj versus raj kumar that where there are staring illegal glaring illegalities the principle of estoppel would not cannot be in hope now i conclude my submissions referring to what are the powers of the recruiting body or the selection committee to deviate from the from the rule or the procedure stated one thing i must confess is that most of these judgments have come in recruitment processes conducted by the high courts themselves though high court says what is article 14 what is article 16 1 to the whole world when high court exercises the power sometimes these glaring illegalities occur you must have been by now aware of the famous after courted statement that rules of the game cannot be changed in the midstream k manjushriva caves where the selection was done by the high court and the selection involved both written examination technique after the interviews were over high court found that the select the merit list was not to its satisfaction so it introduced after the interviews were over it stipulated minimum for entering it resolved that to be included in the select list we will include only those candidates who have secured this minimum percentage in the interview then last year this is ravindran speaking for three bench three bench is a real court held that changing the rule of the game after the game is played is impermissible in law then even earlier the glorious case of how the high court can be here in making these elections is is late down by the supreme court in the shukla's case that is in umesh chandra shukla umesh chandra shukla versus union of india is a case dealing with selections made to the post of subjectures by the delhi see in constitution there is a subtle difference between district judges and subjectures in order the district judges are concerned it is the the high court has greater leeway but when it comes to subjectures the appointing authority is the governor rulemaking authority is the governor and governor is shortened form for the government what happened was the 50 percent was the stipulated minimum in each paper of written exception after conducting and evaluating the performance in examination high court found that certain candidates who have scored very high in some of the papers have found out of the minimum in one or two papers because of which according to the view of the supreme court of view of the high court militarious candidates were being ineligible for vaibhava's stage then the high court decided that in such cases we will add two more two percent by way of moderation to those who have fallen short of 50 percent therefore they added two percent of marks by way of moderation made all of them eligible for interview and conducted the another thing that that was done was that minimum for interview was also fixed by the selected first one was done by adding two percent mark was done by full court of the table full court meeting of the high prescribing minimum was done minimum in the interview was done by the selection committee of the consisting of high court candidates and maybe some others also largely because vangadramya speaking for him for his help high court could not have amended the recruitment rule indirectly by adding two percent by way of moderation yes moderation is an accepted exercise to equalize the minute when it comes to remove the dove and hawk effect in evaluation different standards of evaluation are adopted by different examines but that was not the case here here it was added while rule stipulates that 50 percent is the minimum that can exert by your resort to moderation you have amended the recruitment rule making those who secure 48 percent also eligible for way of therefore the high court had no power to resort to this type of autonomy second thing is said the selection committee has no power to introduce any element which is not there in the suppose recruitment is silent rule is silent and in a aspect it may by by virtue of its inherent power selection committee may devise its own procedures and fill in the gaps but where the rule is clear no minimum in the interview selection committee here in uh introducing the uh minimum marks for the interview therefore on both these counts first analyzing the reservation of the full court thereafter analyzing the decision of this the selection of the the supreme court has to strike have to strike down the selection made with the Delhi high court for appointment of subjectives in Delhi subordinate judiciary therefore this judicial review is the greatest safeguard that we have here the courts are the helpers like for example how much marks the candidate deserves high court cannot sit at selecting body and say that the assessment made with the selecting body is wrong and we will assess the candidate no that is not the role of sub the judicial then what are the weightages like as in Ashok Kumar Yadav where they found the weightages to be on the higher side even then the supreme court did not another the selections made it only laid down law for the but in umesh in the shukla the supreme court set aside the selection because it was compared to the very important and directed the airport to prepare a fresh merit is drawn in the accounts with the law in umesh and the shukla therefore there are certain areas where the judiciary cannot intervene except for proved masking fraud which has initiated the entire selection article 14 and 16 of the first safeguard insistence on adherence to recruitment to the second safeguard rule against bias is the third safeguard and ultimate safeguard is the judicial review but still when it comes to measuring the merit and suitability of the candidate high court cannot sit in the armchair of an expert and then solicit its view on suitability to the substitute you taken with the selecting body which is expert in the subject friends I have tried to cover the processes weightages considerations and safeguards in the recruitment process I am grateful to you now over to you yeah sir I will just ask a trick from also so as usual the session as usual the session took everything what could be the consideration etc and before we take the question let me see as to whether we have any questions in the chat yes sir revaka says even no we can one challenge the appointments if recruitment is not following the norms of minimum qualification requirement at that time can one challenge the treatment in the year 1992 of which year senior senior college aided by the government if the qualification prescribed are not fulfilled by the candidates the appointment would be void or if the notification itself is contrary to the requirement then also the whiteness arises but the question is after how long you can challenge the law on this is any challenge to the appointments or recruitment should remain within a maximum period of one year from the date of appointment even where for example you are the administrative criminals act describes a limitation of one year in a very of course it is a very isolated case but still in a case which arose from the state of where the application had been filed before the tribunal within the limitation of one year tribunal had taken a view that in the challenge to the appointments ground realities could not be cannot be known though the application is filed within the period of limitation prescribed still it suffers from latches in as much as more than six months after appointment the challenge has been advised and that judgment was confirmed in Supreme Court in K. Prakash was the state of the then there is another judgment which came from Andhra Pradesh, they are the appointments were to subordinate to the shape there are also large businesses P. Venetram Reddy he had taken a view that though it is in less than one year ground realities cannot be known therefore they accept in cases where something is visited by fraud and it is a bona fide error even with respect to qualifications the general judicial view appears to be that if a challenge is raised beyond one year it should not be said it should not be accepted but there are cases where suppose the whole thing is a fraud and fraud comes to light after four or five years of appointments even then they should be even in such cases the courts have said mercilessness and them and in dealing with challenges to the recruitment program the courts have adopted two distinct standards one is the cases where challenge is raised before the appointments are made that is soon after select this profession second is where the frauds after the appointments are made after the appointments are made the case is where which others from Punjab appointments made by a particular chairman of the selection is made by a particular chairman of the public service commission there are ultimately some appointments of innocent candidates who have worked for three to four years or five years those were saved but then before appointment the challenge reaches the court alleging malefights fraud large-scale rigging then courts have generally taken a view that the inclusion of a person's name in the select list does not give him an indefensible right to be appointed therefore at that stage the select list is unearthed no tears need be shed for the candidates who have got selected though innocently in a batch of frauds this is the general yardstick that is applied by the courts and as usual in service law everything depends on facts and circumstances of each case and that is the hallmark of service law is facts and circumstances of each case and how you present the facts and circumstances of each case and what is the predominant fact or circumstances in a particular case who killed the balance I would not say that till the justice it would only kill the balance in favor of one or the other group because yes sir so we will try to wrap it off before you have to leave for seven o'clock so like we you're taking across all these judgments the common questions which again arise like Ashok Yadav Leela Dhar then a recent judgment of Dr. Meeta all this and how marks can be given for the interview whether marks can be given or not whether the marks in respect of a class four post can be given for an interview or let's assume there's a teacher because in one of the judgment I was reading where there's no interview and in that respect if you don't have the interview course or you don't have the request to the interview and let's assume he comes out that he's stammering or he's not in that good communication and in that eventuality they said interview is the best request to test the best things now first things first we come to come back to the basics for the professional legal sets what we take from people like you you would like to understand how to remember all these judgments from way back from 81 Leela Dhar then Ashok Yadav in 94 then Dr. Meeta in 91 now the recent judgment of the latest Supreme Court to the effect how do you juxtapose all these judgments and where do you figure in that this 12 and a half percent 33 percent 50 percent has to be considered and where to put how do you fit the round peg in a round hole rather than putting a square peg in a round hole I would cite you the example from see for selecting a civilian written test in the interview or that for selecting a district judge also written test and interviews that for selecting high court judges there is neither written test nor interview at the same time you cannot say that selection of district judges has been the best and selection of high court judges of Supreme Court judges is bad there are goods and bads in both therefore the safest test stage to make an overall assessment on the basis of age group of candidates you are looking at the experience you are you have stated that is the professional experience or whatever experience and having reserved to the tank full age group and the requirements in the candidates you are looking at decide which is the best to determine the suitability it is an assessment an objective assessment that is required to be made having regard to you are taking a holistic view of requirement of the service and requirement of the post which you are making a appointment not take the case of my record of a candidate taken you will be considering candidates above the age group of 50 they would be candidates who have worked in different enterprises almost to the extent of 20 to 30 years if you ask them to take an interview they take a written test they may not even apply for the question they will say I am happy where I am who are to evaluate my papers all these questions of ego has also questions of pragmatism would arise therefore a realistic appreciation of all these components that go into to decide which is the best method for that post is the solution and though normally judiciary would not interfere in the matter of tools of selection if the tools of selection are patently arbitrary or manifest arbitrariness manifest arbitrariness is demonstrated they can interfere for example it happened in the case of appointments to tribunals now tribunal reforms actors come even challenge to it is spending people's therefore several aspects going to decide the recruitment methodology and there is no from 1950 onwards if you take for example the it was the case of a sir interview for admission to professional course from there we came to little of that from there Ashok Yadav now we have latest from I think some distance state public service commission where they said interview should be videographed like a heroic judgment by adventure of the Supreme Court which said livestream to court proceedings within a year of that judgment we are realizing what are the colors of uh uh livestream I am confident during my lifetime courts will realize the heroine blunder committed by them by resort to this uh livestream see these are matters which myriad factors we have to take into account for example in the courts most of us being known and honest opinion of the advocate is sought by the court though he is appearing for a particular party I have come across the situation number of times in the court court would say yes as Mr Rajbapal ever are enough for your client now tell me your honest opinion in life I mean can I give honest opinion this is from advocate side in another case in the very earliest uh uh phase of my career one workman's reinstatement is entitlement to back wages was being very hotly argued I was for the workmen then then another uh established labor practitioner was for the management after hearing the matter for three hours spread over two days just passed on a shift to me in that it was written your client will be entitled to back wages for this period only then I gave a smile of acceptance to the dead and return the chip it was the chip contained a proposition which neither accepted my argument fully nor management's argument could have given that concession even smile even with a silent smile if it was a era of live streaming we're passing off it is visible return my reading the chip is visible return in the chip with a smile is visible imagine see it is easy to be popular but it is difficult to be pragmatic judiciary if the justice delivery system should be efficient should be pragmatic and not theoretical theoretical and theatrical they will never lead you to pragmatic balance in society I'm really afraid that we are disturbing that balance all said and done even in a vocal court system everything cannot be vocal you are risking the advocates you are risking the values of judicial delivery you are risking openness by saying to be open openness should be in exchange of views not in choice of the platform choice of the platform is one openness more important than that is freedom to express genuine views without the fear of reprisal is more important I am a democrat I don't say that openness is bad but at the same time openness is not a panacea also sorry because I think I took you elsewhere no no I was just thinking I was reminded every every coin has two sides therefore some live streaming has its own advantages and as you rightly said so we all will with a flux of time come out and decide as to how things shape up and they say that only the experimentation leads to the right path until or unless they say that it's better to try and fail rather than failing to try we are all channeling channeling is required channeling brings the best of the butter yes so before we part for the day our knowledge partner to victim is here I will ask I have one one small question sir can I ask sir with the permission of Raj Gopal sir can I can I answer sir okay sir in fact you said sir if selection process has to be challenged it has to be challenged within one year as per the Administrative Tribinals Act 3rd but you also said it for the fraud has come to light after some three or four years of the final selection list sir if the take for example I was repeatedly asking for information under the Right to Information Act that was denied that was necessitating me to file first appeal and then come before the Karnataka Information Commission in second appeal and for an appeal to get disposed of before Karnataka Information Commission it will take more than one year sir before one year no information can be we can get from Karnataka Information Commission so three four years has elapsed only now I have come to know that though I have written correct answers in my answer paper those those marks have not been allotted to the correct answers only recently after some four years of this for the publication of final selection list I have come to know that answers have marks have not been allotted to the correct answers written in my answer paper sir now what is the option that is open to me sir it is reliance on right to information as a justification for delay he is not sir you will have to unmute yourself as Gopal sir you will have to unmute yourself till now host was not allowing me to unmute sir as long as I am a host I will be a good host I will allow every guest to be receptive of your knowledge voice is loud but then it cannot go beyond the electronic controls no no he is saying that he got the information only under the right to information act about my performance he is a very difficult thing to believe because normally when a candidate writes a examination he would know what is the mark he he is expecting or he can reasonably expect if his expectation was something totally different from mark say a secure which he would know on the day the select list is published because all public service commission to candidate's own marks after the select list if you had a genuine thing that genuine feeling that he has been deprived of less appropriate marks nothing prevented him from challenging you can always with appropriate data if you are able to convince the court that injustice has been done pursue at the court to summon the answer and then about feeling that it is correct answer there is no absolute correct answer for any question kindly go to conference in this case versus sir book even in objective examination there can be more than one correct answer for one question mark if they awarded to the most correct answer what is the most correct answer most correct answer is what the examiner who said the question paper and in case of doubts the experts to whom reference is made by the public service commission that is the most correct answer and in these matters there cannot be any absolute justice it is the concept is comparative justice several people would have answered the same question whether uniform standards have been applied that yours is the best concept but ultimately everybody who has been examine or value on the same answer and the effect of if the you are feeling that you have been deprived marks several others may also have the marks with the same thing as long as there is no specified act of bias or balance the courts cannot micromanage the evidence yes we feel so many times even to the university in the way we write the examination in the university I feel that I have to have secured first time I may secure or I may not secure this divergence between expectation of a candidate and evaluation by the body is always there and there you cannot say that I got the answer sheet of the four years from the under the right-wing submission act and that may not be a proper defense in the absence of an allegation of yes everybody under evaluation does not want to affirm overall comparative justice is the key which guides the functioning of selecting votes yes suppose somebody says that after 10 years it may come to life that a particular professor had committed blunders in evaluation like it happened in one case where the chief examiner was required to moderate 10 percent of answer strips he evaluated only 10 answer scripts or 16 answer scripts in total and in all the 16 answer scripts he had given exorbitant increase in box it is not difficult to investigate and find out that it was an act of molecules a bona fide era after some years becomes acceptable acceptable in the sense it is not condone but the remedy is lost like your limitation act you may advance one part of the piece one day after expiry in three years you cannot recover for everything there is what is known as time limit and only good thing in service law is that time limit depends on facts and circumstances of each case but the facts and circumstances explained by you I think that it would entitle you for challenging after four years if you feel you can still challenge challenge you should look if the law develops I will be happy but somebody may be unhappy also that's what you said I had reminded of two two things one is which a common man will not understand but the student will over the understand what we say vigilante bus non dormity bus that court helps those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over the rights and number two off top and we say that you cannot wake up just like a rip at mingle or like a concurrent for your rights you have to do it at the right time at the right place and prove them over to you and the best thing is you see what last year this is I agree is from inside in peace adash youths on this case then he said if somebody is aggrieved by the promotion of the junior he should bring the challenge within six months to one year and he added by coming to court after a long time he cannot unscramble the scrambled yet I made this statement appearing for the manager before one of the honorable judges of my high court who knew that I am a pure and strict vegetarian he said what you have to do with me with x I am over your objection he overruled but see because in the facts in the second of that case the court felt that delay is justified therefore we should approach with you they have a towards delay we should have this approach but I left some time we are trying to unscramble the scrambled yet or yet think we are like we are thinking of disturbing a thing which has attained a quietness rickram I was just thinking as these are series we will have to compile every webinar that so far we have had and we should bring it out as a book the handbook that would be helpful for a lot of youngsters interns and even practitioners that is what we have been a series and it has been so enriching that we will have to compile and we will have to share it with you I have a opposition yes sir the lectures I am delivering yes sir is a draft of a book I am authoring so I think by the end of this series a book can be released release yes that's good that's a much better idea and we we are eagerly aware instead of the eggs we will then have the hint which will continue to deliver the eggs so it won't be unstrammling of the egg so that's a very good news which I can say that in a cross examination a tricker has been able to deliver that you will you are coming with a book and we will be eagerly waiting for that I never knew him as a professional but still he succeeded yeah they say practice makes the man perfect though a tricker was already perfect so as usual it was a scholarly presentation thank you so much on my personal behalf on behalf of Mr. Vikas Chhatrat and beyond Los Angeles thank you so much thank you thank you thank you thank you