RAMESHKUMAR VISHWAKARMA Vs. HIGH COURT OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner who has appeared in the preliminary examination for direct recruitment to Higher Judicial Services, has challenged the legality and validity of the action of respondent in fixing the cutoff marks as 80 for general well as for OBC category candidates. It has been averred in the writ petition that candidates belonging to OBC category have been discriminated in the recruitment process. It has further been stated that at least 45 candidates ought to have been called for main examination. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the petitioner has sought the relief of quashing of the list of candidates who have appeared in the preliminary examination for recruitment to the post of District Judge (Entry Level) and has also prayed for a direction to respondent to prepare fresh list of such candidates in the same ratio of proportion as has been done in the case of general category candidates.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that there is no provision in the Rules which empowers the respondent to fix the cut-off marks for appearing in the main examination. In the absence of any provision in the Rule, cut-off marks for appearing in the main examination for recruitment to the post of District Judge to the Higher Judicial Services (Entry Level) could not have been fixed by the respondent. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decisions of Supreme Court in Chhater Singh and others Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 1997 AIR(SC) 303 and State of Punjab and others Vs. Manjit Singh and others, 2003 AIR(SC) 4580.