Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

274
A judge in this case had been associated as Expert Advisor at the time of viva voce test. There
were total 120 marks for the viva voce test. These had been divided under four heads evaluating the
personal quality of the candidates as follows:
Haryana PSC
“a) Awareness, outlook, Subject knowledge and
general interest 30 marks
b) Articulation and expression 30 marks
c) Intelligence and alertness 30 marks
d) Poise, bearing and other qualities 30 marks”
The Judge of this Court was to classify a candidate as Expert Advisor under the following categories:
“Class Marks range
Excellent (E) 26-30
V.Good (G+) 21-25
Good (G) 16-20
Above Average (A+) 11-15
Average (A) 06-10
Poor (P) 01-05”
In this case, the Judge of this Court had graded Anubhav Sharma as ‘G’, Bhanu Partap as ‘P’ and
Vivek Nasir as ‘A+’. After grading given by the Judge, the Chairman and Members of the Commission
had given 18 marks each under the four heads to Anubhav Sharma (in all 72), 15 marks each under
these four heads to Vivek Nasir (in all 60) and five marks each to the present petitioner and that way,
gave 20 marks to the present petitioner.
When the present petitioner was assessed as ‘P’ by the Judge, who was Expert Advisor, the
maximum marks, which could be given to the petitioner in each of the head, were five only and in this
case, the Chairman and Members of the Commission had given the maximum and could not do
anything more.
After 20 marks were added for viva voce test to the total obtained in the written examination by the
petitioner, the total marks were 508 and these were less than 50%. The petitioner could not be
considered to have qualified in the examination since as per Rule 8.1, he had not obtained at least 50%
in aggregate of all papers including via voce test. It may be a case of extreme hardship but no
relaxation against the rules is possible.
Under these circumstances, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed.
***