Supreme Court orders appointment of District Judge aspirant 9 years after he was declared unsuccessful

The Supreme Court recently granted relief to a District Judge aspirant who was declared unsuccessful after a last-minute change to the cut-off rules [Salam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court of Manipur at Imphal and Another]..In doing so, a three-judge bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti also ended the aspirant's (petitioner) nine-year-long legal battle by directing his appointment.The Court found merit in the petitioner's argument that his legitimate expectations were defeated since he was not informed about the new cut-off marks prescribed for the interview segment of the judge-selection process. "The petitioner had no notice about the minimum cut-off for the viva-voce segment which was introduced just on the eve of the viva-voce test, well after the conclusion of written examination. If the candidate had been informed in advance, he could have prepared accordingly, ensuring a fair and predictable process," the Court reasoned. The Court, however, clarified that his seniority would be calculated from the date of his appointment..The Court also quashed a 2015 Manipur High Court resolution that prescribed the 40 per cent minimum cut-off marks in the interview segment on finding that it was introduced without an amendment to the applicable judicial recruitment rules (Manipur Judicial Service Rules, 2005). "While the intention for introducing a minimum cut-off through the High Court Resolution may be bona fide, in the present case, it is not grounded in legality as it cannot override the statutory rules. The minimum marks for interview was prescribed through a High Court Resolution without amending the rules," the Supreme Court said. .By way of background, Salam Samarjeet Singh (petitioner) had appeared in the District Judge (Entry Level) examination in the Manipur Judicial Service Grade-I in 2013.He cleared the written exam and was due to appear for the interview in 2015. However, shortly before the interview, in January 2015, the Full Court of the Manipur High Court issued a resolution to set 40 per cent as the cut-off for the viva voce/ interview.In the interview, Singh scored 18.8 marks out of 50 (less than 40 per cent) and therefore was declared unsuccessful.He challenged this turn of events, arguing that the rules were changed without intimating him of the same. The Court observed that under the Manipur Judicial Service Rules (MJS Rules), 2005 (as it stood in 2013) a candidate only had to cumulatively score 50 per cent or above to be declared successful. Singh would have been declared successful if these rules were applied. The Court concluded that only these rules ought to have been applied in Singh's case and that the resolution passed by the High Court in 2015 was invalid. The Court added that although the new cut-off was later incorporated in the MJS rules with effect from March 2016, these amended rules would not be applicable to Singh's case. "We are quite certain that there was no cut-off marks or pass marks prescribed for the viva-voce examination in the present process when the recruitment advertisement was published ... The decision of the Full Court to depart from the expected exercise of preparing the merit list as per the unamended Rules is clearly violative of the substantive legitimate expectation of the petitioners. It also fails the tests of fairness, consistency, and predictability and hence is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," the Court said.The Court proceeded to order the High Court to appoint Singh as a District Judge. "However, the appointed petitioner will be entitled to seniority only from the date of his appointment. The petitioner shall not be entitled to any actual monetary benefits for any period prior to his appointment. The appointee should be given notional seniority from the year 2015 when the interview was conducted. It is however made clear that this notional seniority is only for the purpose of superannuation benefits," the Court ordered..Advocates Rana Mukherjee, Ahanthem Romen Singh, Oindriala Sen, Mohan Singh, Aniket Rajput, Khoisnam Nirmala Devi and Rajiv Mehta, appeared for the petitioner.Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, and advocates Maibam Nabaghanashyam Singh, Kavya Jhawar and Nandini Rai, appeared for the Manipur High Court..[Read Judgment]