Holding

The Court held that the PSC must furnish the full list of qualified candidates and the Government must select in strict order of merit, entitling the petitioner to appointment.

Summary

Miss Neelima Shangla, ranked 24th in the 1983‑84 Haryana Civil Service (Judicial) examination, claimed that despite 54 qualified candidates, the Haryana Public Service Commission (PSC) recommended only 26 names and withheld the full list from the Government, thereby denying her appointment. The petition under Article 32 argued that the PSC’s duty under the Rules relating to appointment of Subordinate Judges is to publish the complete merit list irrespective of the number of vacancies. The Court examined the relevant rules, particularly Rule 8 (qualification and merit) and Rule 10 (publication of results), and held that the PSC is not concerned with vacancy numbers and must furnish the entire list of qualified candidates to the Government. Consequently, the Government must select candidates strictly in the order of merit, and the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as a Subordinate Judge. An interim order kept one post vacant for her, and the petition was allowed, with costs awarded.

Issues considered

Whether the Haryana Public Service Commission is required to provide the complete list of qualified candidates to the Government irrespective of the number of vacancies.
Whether selection for appointment as Subordinate Judge must be made strictly in the order of merit as prescribed by the Rules.
Whether the withholding of the qualified candidates' names violates the petitioner's constitutional rights under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment as a Subordinate Judge in the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial) Branch.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 234, s. Article 32

Subjects

appointmentpublic service commissionmerit listwithholding of namessubordinate judgesHaryana Civil Servicewrit petitionArticle 32constitutional lawservice law

Judgment

A

NEELIMA SHANGLA Ph.0. tANDIDATE
v.
STATE OF"HARYANA & ORS.
B
SEPTEMBER 17, 1986

[0. CHINNAPPA REDDY ANO M:M~"DUTT, JJ.]

Harypna Civil Services (Judicial Branch)-Subordinate Judges-
Appointment tO-Parts C & D/Rules 7 & 8---Public Service
Commission-Whether it can withhold the name of some of the c
qualified candidates-Duty of the Commission to make available to
government complete list of qualified candidates.

Out GI' 390 candidates who appeared at the test held in 1983-84 for
Sl!lection to the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch), 54 candidates D
·7" · bellinging to the general category, four candidates belonging to the
backward classes, four candidates belonging to scheduled castes and
two candidates belonging to the category of ex-servicemen, qualified for
. appointment by securing the pres~ribed minimum of 55 per cent. The .
petitioner was ranked No. 24. There were 54 vacandes.altogetber but
the Public Service Commission recommendei 26 candidates oniy and E
they included 17 ftoni the general category.

in a Writ petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner
contended (i) that if the rules relating to the appointment of Sub"
ordinate Judges in Haryana had been adhered to, she wonld have been
selected for appointment; and (ii) that 32 candidates in order of merit F

t
from the general category should have been,selected for appointment
- .and that the Service Commission illegally withheld the names of all the
successful candidates from the Government ahd the High Court. ·

• Allowing the writ petiiion,
G
HELD: 1.1 The scheme of the rules relating to the appointment
of Subordinate Judges in Haryana appears to be that the Public Service
Commission should hold first a written test in subjects chosen by the
High Court and next a Viva-voce test. The result of the examination is
required to he published in the Haryana Gazette and the selecti<in for
appointment is to be made strictly in the order in which the candidates

785
786 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1986] 3 S.C.R.

A have been placed by the Service Commission in. the list of candidates
qualified under rule 8 of Part-C. [790B-D]

1.2 Under the "Roles relating to the appointment of Subordinate
Judges in Haryana", the Public Service Commission is not concerned
with the number of vacancies at all. Nor is it expected to withhold the
B full list of successful candidates on the ground that only a limited
number of. vacancies are available. The duty of the Public Service
Commission is confined to holding the written examination, holding the )
Viva-voce test and arranging the order of merit according to marks
among that·candidates who have qualified as a result of the written and
the Viva-voce tests. Thereafter the Public Service Commission is
c required to publish the result in the Gazette and, apparently to make
the result available to the Government. The Public Service Commission
is not required to make any further selection from the qualified
candidates and is, therefore, not expected to withhold the names of any
qualified candidates. The duty of the Public Service Commission is to
make available to the Government a complete list of qualified
D candidates arranged in order of merit. Thereafter the Government is to
make the selection strictly in the order in which they have been placed
by the Commission as a result of the examination. The names of the
selected candidates are then to he entered in the Register maintained by
the High Court strictly in that order and appointments made from the
names entered in that Register also strictly in the ~ame order. It is, of
E course, open to the Government not to fill up all the vacancies for a
valid reason. [790E-H; 791A]

2. The selection cannot arbitrarily be restricted to a few candi-
dates, notwithstanding the number of vacancies and the availability of ~
qualified candidates. There must be a conscious application of the mind
F of the Government and the High Court before the number of persons · ·
sele<;ted for appointment is restricted. Any other interpretation would I
make rule 8 of Part D of the Rules relating to the appointment of
Subordinate Judges in Haryana meaningless. [791D-E]

In the . instant case, ~he reason given by the Public Service
G Commission for not communicating the entire list of qualified candi-
dates to the Government is that they were originally informed that there
were only 28 vacancies. That is not a sound reason at all. The net result
is that qualified candidates, though available, were not selected and
were not appointed. The petitioner is one of them. Therefore, she is
entitled to be selected for appointment as Subordinate Judge in the
H Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch). [791F; 792B-C]
NEELIMA SHANGLA v. STATE OF HARYANA [READY. J.I 787

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil} No. 292 of A
1986.

UnderArticle 32 of the Constitution oflndia.

Petitioner-in-person.
B
C.M. Nayar, C.V. Subba Rao, Pankaj Katra, Ms. Abha Jain,
~ A.K. Goel, T.V.S.N.ChariandS.M. AshrifortheRespondents '

The Judgment of the Courtws delivered by

· 0. CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. Miss Neelima Shangla desires to be c
appointed to the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial) Branch. She has a
brilliant academic record. The certificates produced !)y her show that
from Matriculation to LLB. she has passed every one of her
examinations in the first qi vision. She was ranked No. 2 in the LL. B.
examination of the Punjab University. She was awarded the national D
merit scholarship and the UGC's scholarship. She was also awarded
the medal for the best all round student of the Law Department in the
year 1980-81. Her extra-curricular ~ctivities also appear to be of a very
high order. She was President of the College Young Speakers' Club,
Vice-President of the College Students' Coul)cil, the best camper and
debater and represented the Punjab University in the All-India Rock
E
Climbing and Mountaineering Camp. She was the student Editor of
the College Magazine, the Law Review and the Punjab University
Magazine. She has also some publisheq works to her credit. She
appeared at the competitive test held in 1983-84 for selection to the
Haryana Civil Service (Judicial) Branch. She secured 60.8 per cent
marks in the written test and 50.5 per cent marks in the viva·voce test.
· -- She was ranked No. 24. It may be mentioned here that there were F
altogether 774 applicants; while 390 only appeared at the test. Out of
the candidates who appeared at the te~t, 54 candidates belonging to
·the general category, four candidates belonging to backward classes,
four candidates belonging to scheduted castes and two candidates
belonging to the category of ex-servicemen, qualified for appointment
G
by securing the prescribed minimum of 55 per cent. According to the
petitioner, though there were 54 vacancies altogether, the Public
Service Commission·purporied to recommend 26 candidates only and
they included 17 from the general category. The petitioner claims that
32 candidates in order of merit from the general category should have
been selected for appointment and that the Service Commission_
H
'
788 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1986] 3 S.C.R.

A illegally withheld the names of all the successful candidates from the
Government and the High Court. She contents that if the rule• had
been adhered to, she would have been selected for appointment. To
appreciate her submission, it is necessary to refer to the relevant rules.
The rules relating to the appointment of Subor_dinate Judges in
B Haryana are in six parts-A, B, C, D, E & F. Part A deals with
qualifications. Part B deals with submission of rolls. Part C deals with
examination of candidates. Rule 1 of Part C provides that an exami-
nation will be held at a place to be determined by the Haryana Public
Service Commission. Rule 5 provides that the Judges of the High
Court rnay, from time to time, declare the subjects in which the
examination will be held. Rule 7 prescribes that no candidate shall be
c called for the viva-voce test unless he obtains at least 45 per cent marks
in the aggregate in all the written papers and 33 per cent marks in the
language paper, Hindi (in Devanagri script). Rule 8 is important and it
is as follows:

"No candidate shall be considered to have qualified in the
D
examination unless he obtains at least 55 per cent in the
aggregate of all papers including Viva-Voce test.

The merit of the qualified candidates shall be de-
termined strictly according to the marks obtained by them.
E
Provided that in case two or more candidates obtain
equal marks, their merit shall be determined according
to the marks secured by them in the Viva-Voce and if
the marks in the Viva-Voce of the candidates are also
equal, the older in age shall be placed higher in order of
merit,"
F
Rule JO is also important and it is as follows:

. "(i) The result of the examination will be published in
Haryana Government Gazette.
G (ii) Candidates will be selected for appointment strictly in
the order in which they have been placed by the Haryana
Public Service Commission in the list of those who have
qualified under rule 8: ..l
Provided that in the case of candidates belonging to
NEELIMA SHANGLA v. STATE OF HARYANA [READY, l.] 789
A
the Scheduled Castes/Tribes and other Backward Classes,
Government will have a right to select in order of merit· a
candidat~ who has merely qualified under rule 8, irres-
pective of the position obtained by him in the examination:

Provided further that the selection of candidates B
belonging to the Scheduled Castes/Tribes and other Back-
ward Classes in the order of merit inter se shall be made
. against the vacaneies reserved for them and in the manner
prescribed by Government from time to time."

Part D of the rules deals with "Appointment''. Rule 1 of Part D is as
, follows: c
"The names of candidates, selected by Government for
appointment as Subordinate Judges under rules 10 and 11
of Part C, shall be entered on the High Court Register in
the order of their selection." D

Rule 7(1) may also be extracted and it is as follows:

"Whenever it shall appear to the Judges that a vacancy or
vacancies in the cadre of the Judicial Branch of the
Haryana Civil Service, whether permanent, temporary or E
officiating, should be filled, they will ma.ke a selection from
the High Court Register in the order in which the names
have been entered in the register under rule I of this Part.
The name or names of the selected candidate or candidates
will be forwarded to Gpvernment for. appointment as
Subordinate Judges under Article 234 of the Constitution of F
India: Every Subordinate Judge shall, in the first insta!'ce,
be appointed on probation for two years but this period
may be extended from time to time expressly or impliedly
so that the total period of probation including extension, if
any, does not exceed three years.
G
Explanation-The period of probation shall be
deemed to have been extended impliedly if a Subordinate
Judge is not confirmed on the, expiry of his period of
probation." .

Rule 8 is again important and it is as follows: H
790 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 11986] 3 S.C. R.

A "There is no limit to the number of names borne on the
High Court Register but ordinarily no more names "!ill be
included than are estimated !o be sufficient for the filling of
vacancies which are anticipated to be likely to occur within
tw" years from the date of selection of candidates as a
result of an examination."
B

The scheme of the rules appears to be that the Public Service
Commission should hold first a written test in subjects chosen by the
High Court and next a Viva-Voce test. Unless a candidate secures 45
per cent of the marks in the written papers and 33 per cent in the
language paper, he will not be called for the Viva-Voce test. All
c candidates securing 55 per cent of the marks in the aggregate in the
.I
written and Viva-Voce tests are considered as qualified for appoint-
ment, their .merit being determined strictly in accordance with the
marks obtained by them. The result of the examination is required to
\
be published in the Haryana Gazette and the.selection for appoint-
. ment is to be made strictly in the order in which they have been placed
D
by the Service Commission in the list of candidates qualified under
rule 8 of Part-C. The names of the selected candidates are to be
entered in a Register maintained by the High Court in the order of
their selection and appointments are to· be made from the names
entered in the Register in that order. Tue number of names to be
entered in the Register maintained by the High Court may be suffi-
E cient to fill vacancies anticipated to occur within two years from the
date of selection of candidates as a result of the examination. There-
fore, it appears that the duty of the Public Service Commission is
confined to holding the written examination, holding the Viva-Voce
test and arranging the order of merit according to marks among the
candidates who have qualified as a result of the ":rit.ten and th~ Viva- _ ""
F Voce tests. Thereafter the Pubhc Service Comm1ss1on 1s reqmred to ·--"'II
publish the result in the Gazette and, apparently to make the result
available to the Government. Tue Public Service Commission is not
required to make any further selection from the qualified candidates
and is, therefore, not expected to withheld the names of any qualified
candidates. The duty of the Public Service Commission is to make
G available to the Gov~rnment a complete list of qualified candidates
arranged in order of merit. Thereafter tl)e Government is to make the
selection strictly in the order in which they have been placed by the
Commission as a result of the examination. Tue names of the selected
candidates are then to be entered in the Register maintained by the High
Court strictly in that order and appointments made from the names
H
NEELIMA SHANGLA v. STATE OF HARYANA (READY, J.J - 791 ·

. ")-· ~ntered in that Register also strictly in the same order. It is, of course, A
open· to the Government not to fill up all the vacancies for a valid
·reason. The Government and the High Court ·may, for example,
decide. liat, :hough 55 per cent is the minimum qualifying mark, in the
li1terests of higher standards, they would not appoint anyone who has
. obtained less than 60 per cent of the marks. Something of that nature B
·happened in State of Haryana v. Subash Chander Marwah & Ors. In
~ that case, though the rules prescribed a minimum 45 per cent of the
" aggregate marks to be qualified for appointment as a Subordinate .
Judge, the High Court and the Go....-einment decided not to appoint
~--candidates who had secured· less than 55 per cent marks. The resuH
was that although there were a large number of vacancies, only a few
candidates· were selected for appointment. The selection was cha!- · c
lenged on the ground that it could i:iot be so restricted when qualified .
candidates were available. ,This court rejected the submission and
,.-., upheld· the selection.· However, as we said, the ·selection cannot
arbitrarily be restricted .to a few candidates, notwithstanding the
number of,'vacancies and the availability of qualified candi.dates. D
There must be a conscious application of the mind of the Government
· and the High Court before the number of p~rsons selected for
appointment is restricted.· Any other interpretation would make rule 8
_ of Part D meaningless. In the present case, though the rules requiied
the Public Service Commission to publish the result o~ the examination·,
)....and, apparently, also to communicate the result to the Government, .E
the Public Service Commission did not publish the result in the first
instance and sent only the names of 17 candnates belonging to general
category to the Government, though many more had qualified. That
was wrong. The names of all the qualified candidates had to be sent to
~ the Government. The reason given by the Public Service Commission
for not communicating the entire list of qualified candidates to F
i.
Government is that they were originally informed that there were only
--{ 28 vacancies. That· is not a sound reason at all. Under ihe "Rules
relating to the appointment of Subordinate Judges in Haryan~", the
Puhlfc Service Commission is not concerned with the number of
vacancies at all. Nor is it expected to withhold the full list of successful
.candidates on the ground that only a limited number of vacancies are G
available. The Government of Haryana.has taken the stand that they
were unable to select and appoint more candidates as the names of •
. only a few candidates. were: sent to the~ by the Public Service
-..( Commission. It now transpires that even before the Public Service
Commission sent its truncated list to the Government, the High Court
had already informed the Government that there were more vacancies H.
792 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1986] 3 S.C.R.

A which required to be filled. The Government not knowing that the
names of several candidates who were qualified had been withheld
from the Government by the Service Commission, wrote to the Service
Cornmision to held a fresh competitive examination. If the Govern-
ment had been aware that there were qualified candidates available,
they would have surely applied rule 8 of Part D and made the
B
necessary selection to be communicated to the High CcJrt. The net
result is that qualified candidates, though available, were not selected
and were not appointed. Miss Neelima Shangla is one of them . In the
view that we have taken of the rules, Miss Neelima Shangla is entitled
to be selected for appqintment as Subordinate Judge in the Haryana
Civil Service (Judicial) Branch. By an interim order of this Court, one
c post of Subordinatt: Judge has been kept vacant for her.

We direct the first respondent (Government of Haryana) to
include the name of the petitioner (Miss Neelima Shangla) in the 1984
List of candidates selected for appointment as subordinate judges in the
Haryal!a Judicial Service (Judicial Branch) and forward the same to
D the High Court of Pun jab and Haryail'a for inclusion in the High Court
Register maintained under Rule 1 of Part D of the Rules. She will be
entitled to her due place in the Seniority List of the 1984 batch. The
petitioner will be entitled to her costs which we quantify at Rs.5000.

As a result of our finding a few more candidates would also be --~
E
entitled to be illcluded in the Select List and ordinarily we would have
·directed their inclusion in the list. But having regard to the fact that
most of the others have not ehosen to question the selection and the
circumstance that two years have elapsed. we do not propose to make
any such general order as that would completely upset the subsequent
selection and create confusion and multiplicity of problems. The cases ~
F
of any other candidate who may have already filed a writ petition in ·
this Court or the High Court will be disposed of in the light of this
judgment. '.These who have not so far chosen to question the selection
will not be allowed to de so in the future because of their !aches.

M.L.A. Petition allowed.