SALIL MAHESHWARI Vs. HIGH COURT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the framing of a question paper for the Delhi Judicial Service (DJS) Preliminary Examination, 2014 by the first respondent, the Delhi High Court, as being contrary to the law laid down in the case of Gunjan Sinha Jain v. Registrar General High Court of Delhi, in , W.P.(C). No. 449/2012.

(2.) THE writ petitioner is a law graduate who, in accordance with an advertisement dated 18.2.2014 for recruitment to the Delhi Judicial Service ("DJS"), took the exam held on 1.6.2014. 80 vacancies were advertised, of which 55 were for the General Category of candidates. The exam was to comprise of three parts, the preliminary exam, the main exam and the interview, and a candidate was required to secure a minimum of 60%, or 120 marks out of 200, and obtain a rank within ten times the number of vacancies advertised ("the requisite number"), to be eligible for the main exam after the preliminary exam. An answer key was published by a public notice on 9.6.2014 and objections were invited to the proposed answers from the candidates, before 23.6.2014. Accordingly, the petitioner conveyed his objections by speed post on 17.6.2014 against 11 answers in the answer key. The respondent accepted 3 of the 87 objections by its public notice of 2.7.2014. Of those accepted, one had been raised by the petitioner. On 8.7.2014, the results of the exam were declared and the petitioner was awarded 126.75 marks (which was more than the 60% minimum), while the cut -off marks fixed were 128.75. Out of a total 9033 candidates in the examination, the petitioner secured the 6196th position. Despite having secured the 60% minimum, the petitioner did not find a place within the requisite number.

(3.) THIS Court, when it was seized of this matter, also heard and subsequently dismissed W.P. (C) 4974/2014, with this order: