
The Supreme Court has ruled that prescribing a minimum qualifying benchmark of 25% marks in the viva-voce or interview stage for government job selections is neither arbitrary nor whimsical. LiveLaw reports that…
The Supreme Court has ruled that prescribing a minimum qualifying benchmark of 25% marks in the viva-voce or interview stage for government job selections is neither arbitrary nor whimsical. LiveLaw reports that the Court held the condition to be rooted in 'profound administrative necessity' to preserve the integrity, calibre, and quality of recruitment.
The ruling came in a recent weekly digest of judgments from July 16 to 23. The decision reinforces the discretion of public service commissions and government departments to set qualifying standards for interviews, as long as they are reasonable and not excessive.
The usual narrative pits interviews as an inert, corruptible filter meant only to favour the connected. But this ruling rightly reminds us that a wholly written-test-based system can also be a blunt instrument, incapable of screening for temperament or quick thinking. The real test is whether the 25% floor will be applied transparently, with marks disclosed. That single data point will determine if this is a shield for merit or a fig leaf for patronage.
Source: livelaw.in
This story was synthesised by AI from the source linked above.