Summary
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's view that the minimum qualifying percentage for City Manager recruitment under the Bihar City Manager Cadre Rules, 2014 and the advertisement applies only to the 70-mark written test, not to the aggregate of 100 marks including experience. A candidate with no experience who crossed 32% in the written test had to be placed on the merit list, and an earlier 2007 executive order could not add a different criterion to the 2014 Rules.
Issues
- Whether the minimum qualifying marks prescribed in the advertisement for City Manager posts apply to the written test alone or to the total of 100 marks including experience marks.
- Whether the executive order dated 16.07.2007 on uniform minimum qualifying marks could be used to supplement or clarify the Bihar City Manager Cadre Rules, 2014.
Provisions considered
- Rule 5, Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014Quoted: recruitment by written examination for 70 of 100 marks, with 10 marks per year (maximum 30) for contractual City Manager experience. Read with the advertisement, it was held that the qualifying percentage in the written test fixes eligibility for the consideration zone, while experience marks count only in ranking on the merit list; the Rule prescribes no minimum out of 100. (¶¶ 4, 16, 17, 18)
- Rule 11, Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014Quoted residual clause applying State rules and orders to matters not covered. Held not to import the 2007 executive order as an additional selection criterion; nothing in Rules 5 and 11 requires minimum marks out of the total of 100. (¶¶ 4, 13, 18, 19)
- Article 309, Constitution of IndiaNoted as the source of the 2014 Rules, whose statutory character gives them primacy over the earlier executive order. (¶¶ 3, 20)
Held
- On a harmonious reading of Rules 5 and 11 with the advertisement, securing the prescribed percentage in the written examination makes a candidate eligible for the consideration zone; the merit list is then prepared by adding experience marks. A candidate who qualifies in the written test without experience is eligible, though low in merit, while a candidate who fails the written-test minimum is ineligible however many experience marks he has. (¶¶ 16, 17)
- The minimum qualifying marks relate only to the written test and have no relevance to the final preparation of the merit list; excluding the first respondent, who crossed 32% of the written-test marks applicable to women, from the merit list was contrary to the advertisement. (¶¶ 17, 19, 21)
- An executive order of 2007 cannot be treated as clarificatory or explanatory of Rules framed in 2014; the only minimum qualifying criteria are those in the Rules and the advertisement, and the High Court rightly refused to apply the 2007 order. (¶ 19)
- Employees' State Insurance Corporation v. Union of India, holding that statutory regulations prevail over executive decisions, does not help the appellants; it supports giving primacy to the 2014 Rules over the earlier executive order. (¶ 20)
Result
Appeals dismissed; the High Court's judgment directing that the first respondent and similarly placed candidates be considered on the basis of qualifying marks in the written test and a merit list be prepared was upheld.