Shashi Pal vs State of H.P. and others

Surjit Singh, Judge

Heard and gone through the record.

Petitioner was one of the several candidates for the posts of constables, which were advertised for Solan district. He cleared written examination as also the physical fitness test and was called for interview, along with several other candidates. Last candidate, who was selected from un-reserved category, to which category the petitioner also belongs, secured 73 marks in all. Name of that candidate is Parveen Kumar. This candidate was awarded 8.5 marks in viva voce test. Petitioner was awarded 6.33 marks in the viva voce test and his total score was 71.83. His grievance is that he had been awarded less marks in viva voce, with a view to eliminating him and selecting other candidates. So, he has filed the present writ petition, seeking issuance of a direction to the respondents to select and appoint him to a post of constable.

Respondents have filed reply in which it is stated that petitioner''s score being less than that of the last candidate of his category selected and recruited, he has no right to be declared as selected for appointment.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the score of the petitioner in the written test was higher than that of the last candidate, selected for appointment, namely Parveen Kumar, but the marks awarded to him in the interview, are less than the marks awarded to said Parveen Kumar. It is nowhere provided any law or the rules, nor is it a rule of precedence that candidates should be awarded marks in the interview, proportionate to their performance or score in the written test. Hence, writ petition is dismissed.