In Nagmani Case, 25% held not excessive. 2009 5 SCC 515
In Kiran Gupta case, 15% held not excessive. 2000 7 SCC 719
In Ashok Kumar Case, 22.2% was considered excessive and arbitrary. 1992 1 SCC 28
In Ajay Hasia case, 33.3% was held arbitrary. 1981 1 SCC 722
In Minor A Peeriakaruppan, 75 marks for oral interview out of total 275 was held arbitrary. 1971 1 SCC 38
In Nishi Magnu case 50 marks for oral interview out of total 150 marks was held arbitrary. 1980 4 SCC 95
In Mohinder Sain Garg Case, 25% was held excessive 1991 1 SCC 662
In P. Mohanan Pillai Case, 50% was held excessive 2007 9 SCC 497
Summarily : Excessive marks allocated for oral interviews for appointments or for promotions makes the whole process arbitrary. It becomes breeding ground for corruption.
10% for oral interview is ideal.
Haresh Raichura
1/6/2014
