HOMEORK NUMBER 9

STUDENT NAME: RAHUL CH

ROLL NUMBER: 18LLB023

CASE NAME:Ashok Kumar Yadav And Ors. Etc. vs State Of

Haryana And Ors

CITATION: 1987 AIR 454

FACTS:
Rule 9clause (1) of the Punjab Civil Service(Executive Branch),
Rules 1930 prescribes a competitive examination for recruitment to
posts in Haryana Civil Service (Executive) and other allied services.
Regulation I in appendix I says that the competitive exam shall
include compulsory and optional subjects, every student should
attempt all compulsory exams and any 3 of the optional exams, it also
said that the ex servicemen are not required to attempt the optional
subjects. Regulation 5 states that a general candidate aggregate marks
are 700 where the compulsory subjects carry 400 marks, viva voice
consists of 200 marks and optional subject consists of 100 marks. For
ex servicemen the aggregate marks are 400 marks, in both the cases
viva voice consists of 200 marks. Regulation 3 states that no
candidate is eligible to appear for viva voice unless he gets 45 percent
marks in the aggregate of all subjects. In a written examination held
by the Haryana PublicService Commission for recruitment to 61
posts in HaryanaCivil Service (Executive) and other allied
Services, over 1300 candidates obtained more than 45% marks and
thus qualified658 for being called for interview for the viva voce
examination. The Haryana Public Service Commission invited all the
candidates for the viva voce examination and theinterviews lasted for
almost half a year. The number of vacancies also rose during the time
taken up in the writtenexamination and the viva voce test and
ultimately 119 postsbecame available for being filled and on the basis
of total marks obtained in the written examination as well a viva-voce
test, 119 candidates were selected and recommended bythe Haryana
Public Service Commission to the StateGovernment. The
respondents-petitioners had obtained high marks inthewritten
examination but owing to rather poor marks obtained in the viva voce
test, they could not comewithin the first 119 candidates and were
consequently notselected. They filed many writs in different courts.
ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT:
whether the Chairman and members of the Haryana Public Service
Commission were men of integrity, calibre and qualification or not.
Whether the selection to be cancelled as the relatives of the members
of interview panel were present.
CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENTS:
(i) that the Chairman and members of the Haryana Public
ServiceCommission were not men of high integrity,calibre
andqualification and they were appointed solely as a matter of
political patronage and hence the selections made by them were
invalid
(ii) that three of the selected candidates were related to two members
of the Commission and though these twomembers did not
participate in the interview of theirrespective relatives, they did
participate in the interview of other candidates and the tactic adopted
by the Chairman and the members of the Commission was to give
high marks tothe relatives and award low marks to the other
candidates soas to ensure the selection of their relatives. This vitiated
the entire selection process.
(iii) that the number of candidates called for interview were almost
20 times the number of vacancies and this not only imposed an
intolerable burden on the Haryana Public Service Commission but
also widened the scope for arbitrariness in selection.
(iv)that the allocation of 200 marks for the viva voce test out of a
total of 900 marks for the generality of students and a total of 600
marks for ex servicemen was arbitrary.
(v)that the viva voce test was notconducted fairly and honestly and
the selections made werevitiated on account of
nepotism,favouritism, casteismand also political motivation.
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANTS:
(i)that not only was it not competent to the Court on the existing set
of pleadings to
examine whether the Chairman and members of the Haryana Public
Service Commission were men of high integrity, calibre and
qualification but also there was no material at all on the basis of
which the Court could possibly come tothe conclusion that they were
men lacking integrity, calibreor qualification.
(ii) As a part of Public Service Commission the members has
withdrawn themselves from interviewing their relatives.
(iii) that under Regulation 3 in Appendix I, the Haryana Public
Service Commission was justified in calling for interview all the
1300 and odd candidates who qualified by getting more than 45%
marks.
(iv) that the allocation of 200 marks for the viva voce test was
made under the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules,
1930 and it had stood the test of time and could not possibly be
regarded as arbitrary or excessive.
(v) that the selections were made fairly and honestly and they were
not tainted by nepotism, favouritism, casteism or political patronage,
besides there was nothing to show that any extraneous considerations
had influenced the selectionprocess.
It is one of the fundamental principles ofjurisprudence that no man
can be a judge in his own causeand that if there is a reasonable
likelihood of bias it is'in accordance with natural justice and
common sense that the justice likely to be so biased should be
incapacitatedfrom sitting". The question is not whether the judge
isactually biased or in fact decides partially, but 661 whether there is
a real likelihood of bias. What isobjectionable in such a case is
not that the decision isactually tainted with bias but that the
circumstances are such as to create a reasonable apprehension in the
mind ofothers that there is a likelihood of bias affecting the
decision. The basic principle underlying this rule is that justice must
not only be done but must also appear to bedone and this rule has
received wide recognition in severaldecisions of the Supreme Court.
It is also important to notethat this rule is not confined to cases where
judicial powerstrict to sense is exercised. It is appropriately extended
toall cases where an independent mind has to be applied toarrive at
a fair and just decision between the rival claimsof parties. Justice is
not the function of the courts alone;it is also the duty of all those who
are expected to decide fairly between contending parties. The strict
standardsapplied to authorities exercising judicial power are
beingincreasingly applied to administrative bodies, for it isvital to
the maintenance of the rule of law in a welfarestate where the
jurisdiction of administrative bodies isincreasing at a rapid pace that
the instrumentalities of theState should discharge their functions in
a fair and justmanner. Where reasonable likelihood of bias is alleged
onthe ground of relationship, the question would always be as to how
close is the degree of relationship or in other words, is the
nearness of relationship so great as to give rise to reasonable
apprehension of bias on the part of theauthority making the selection.

JUDGEMENT: The High Court set aside the selections made by the
Haryana Public Service Commission and directed the Haryana Public
Service Commission and the State of Haryana to forthwith declare
the result of candidates of all categories on the basis of written
examination alone, scrupulously excluding all considerations of the
viva voce test.
The Supreme Court directed that when selections to theJudicial
Service are being made in a State, a sitting Judge of the High Court
to be nominated by the Chief Justice ofthe State should be invited to
participate in the interviewas an expert who, by reason of the fact that
he is a sittingHigh Court Judge, knows the quality and character of
thecandidates appearing for the interview and the advice given by
him should ordinarily be accepted, unless there are strong and
cogent reasons for not accepting such advice and such strong must be
recorded in writing by the Chairman and members.