[Civil Judge Junior Division Exams] Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders Removal Of Ineligible Candidates From Prelims Stage By Applying Amended Recruitment Rules

Regarding the Civil Judge (Entry Level) Judiciary Exams, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ordered the 'weeding out of candidates' found to be ineligible under the Amended Recruitment Rules since these Rules were upheld by the High Court and Apex Court in April 2024.

This would effectively mean that candidates would be deemed ineligible even if they cleared the stage of Preliminary Exams and appeared in the Mains on the strength of the Apex Court's interim order, permitting them to do so under the old M.P. Judicial Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994.

“… Once the Amended Recruitment Rules were upheld not only by this Court but also by Apex Court, the right course of action should have been to weed out all those ineligible candidates, who failed to satisfy the Amended Recruitment Rules and who were provisionally allowed to appear by way of judicial order in the Preliminary Examination”, the court held in its order that no ineligible candidate can be allowed to secure the post of Civil judge (Entry Level).

The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Amar Nath (Kesharwani) have recalled the order dated 07.05.2024 passed in W.P. No.12399/2024 for being erroneous since the court had then failed to grasp the pertinence of the concept behind cut-off marks. The entire recruitment process since the stage of Preliminary Exams was subject to the outcome of the writ petitions challenging vires of the Amended Rules, the court emphasised.

“…Order under review suffers from error apparent on the face of the record since it overlooks the cardinal and palpable fact that weeding out of ineligible candidates at the Preliminary Examination stage would lead to reduction in the number of candidates who secured passing marks in Preliminary Examination…”, the bench sitting at Jabalpur observed that this will rightly lead to a reduction in the cut-off marks, making many candidates eligible for the mains exam.

The court has also ordered the recomputation of cut-off marks by applying the ratio of 1:10 under Clause 7(2) of the Advertisement issued. The court has clarified that fresh call letters will be issued to those candidates who have secured adequate marks as per the recomputed cut-off after applying the new rules and weeding out the ineligible candidates. Those candidates who clear the prelims for the first time will be invited to appear in fresh Main Examinations. Till these rectifying measures are taken, the recruitment process will be halted.

In May 2024, two candidates preferred another writ [W.P. No.12399/2024] saying that they were eligible under the Amended Recruitment Rules but failed to make it to the main examination on account of the cut-off marks fixed at 113 for the Unreserved Category.

The mains exam and the fact that it has already been conducted cannot come in the way of aggrieved candidates seeking the weeding out of ineligible candidates, the court added.

Court stated that the earlier order was erroneous since if the ineligible candidates were not weeded out from the stage of Preliminary Exams, it would help those ineligible candidates to secure appointments as Civil Judge (Entry Level).

The plea made by the petitioners in W.P 12399/2024 was that if the candidates who should be deemed ineligible in the Prelims on account of the application of Amended Recruitment Rules are weeded out, then the cut-off marks in the Prelims would go much below the erstwhile 113 marks.

As per the 2023 amendment in Rule 7 of the Recruitment Rules, candidates would be eligible for the examination if they possess a Bachelor's Degree in Law, and have continuously practised as an advocate for not less than 3 years on the last date fixed for submission of the application, or are outstanding law graduates with a brilliant academic career, having “passed all exams in the first attempt” and securing “at least 70% marks” in the aggregate for the general and OBC categories. An advertisement was also issued accordingly in November 2023.

The results of the main examination were declared on 10.05.2024.

The court added that the candidates who have cleared the prelims or mains cannot claim any right per se until an order of appointment is issued. Stating the above reasons, the court allowed the review petition.

Background

The apex court, in December 2023, while hearing a challenge against the validity of amended rules, permitted the candidates to appear in the prelim exam as per the unamended rules, subject to the outcome of the W.P. No.15150/2023 pending before the High Court.[ Monika Yadav and others vs. High Court of M.P. & Anr].

In the prelims, 926 candidates qualified subject to the outcome of W.P No.15150/2023 challenging the vires of the new recruitment rules. The main examination was also held in March 2024. Later, on 01.04.2024, WP No. 15150/2023 was dismissed by the High Court, hence affirming the validity of the new Recruitment Rules. The apex court also upheld the order of the High Court's division bench in the matter.

The aggrieved candidates had in WP 12399/2024 sought a direction to quash the preliminary results dated 10.03.2024 and re-evaluate the marks in accordance with the new eligibility criteria since the vires of the Amended Recruitment Rules have been upheld by the high court and the apex court. The candidates, hence, urged the court to re-evaluate the marks in accordance with the revised eligibility criteria and conduct the main exam as per the revised results. The High Court had then dismissed the pleas made by these candidates. The candidates preferred the current review petition against this order dated 07.05.2024.

In review, the High Court filed a reply and justified the order made by the division bench by stating that the apex court order is dated 26.04.2024, and the weeding out of ineligible candidates can only commence from then alone, and not from the erstwhile preliminary stage.

The High Court took the stance that retrospective application of the consequences arising from upholding the Amended Rules will adversely affect the candidates, who will be forced to appear in the Mains Exam yet again.

Case Title: Jyotsna Dohalia & Anr. v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.

Case No: R.P. No.620 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 92

Click Here To Read/ Download Order