Summary
The moderation committee could fix a qualifying cutoff for Paper III of the Jharkhand Eligibility Test after the advertisement. The governing UGC scheme expressly entrusted subject-wise cutoffs to that committee; the advertised Papers I and II threshold did not itself establish eligibility. In this scheme, the later cutoff did not amount to changing selection rules.
Issues
- Whether the moderation committee could set the Paper III cutoff later when the advertisement specified none.
- Whether the cutoff impermissibly changed the rules during the eligibility process.
Held
- The UGC scheme constituted the moderation committee to determine subject-wise cutoffs for declaring results. That exercise could account for candidate performance and the competence expected of potential lecturers. (¶¶ 5, 6)
- The advertisement’s threshold for Papers I and II did not remove the committee’s authority to fix Paper III standards. Under this scheme, doing so later was an additional contemplated assessment rather than an impermissible change in the rules. (¶¶ 2, 6, 7)
- The High Court erred in holding that the Commission could not prescribe the Paper III minimum. The candidate who failed that cutoff was not entitled to the relief granted below. (¶¶ 3, 8)
Result
Commission’s Civil Appeal 9441 of 2019 allowed and the High Court judgment set aside. The writ petitioner’s Civil Appeal 9442 of 2019 dismissed.