The candidates argued that introducing a 75% threshold after the start of the recruitment process amounted to a « change in the rules of the game after the match ». This was ruled « clearly inadmissible » by a 3-judge panel of the Supreme Court in K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008). In addition, they argue that the retroactive decision of the Chief Justice was not approved by a valid law and violated the right to equality and the right to discrimination. Rajasthan HC argued that strict enforcement of Manjusree`s decision would require them to hire the 13 candidates who performed relatively better than the others but scored low overall. They highlighted the Supreme Court`s judgment in State of Haryana v. Subhash Chander Marwaha (1973), who stated that state governments may set higher threshold scores to maintain a high standard for the selection of candidates. In addition, they argued that the Court`s judgment in the Manjusree case did not take into account the decision of Subhash Chander Marwaha. The Chamber referred the case to a 5-member constitutional chamber on 20 March 2013.
The order for reference stated that the specific « rules of the game », which cannot be changed, required a binding declaration by a larger chamber of the Supreme Court. However, a chamber for the case was not constituted until 29 August 2022. The Supreme Court decides whether the « rules of the game » can be changed in a selection procedure for public office after the selection procedure has been initiated. The rules of procedure required candidates to sit for a written examination followed by a personal interview. After going through these two stages, the former Chief Justice of the High Court of Rajasthan, Jagadish Bhalla, ruled that candidates had to score 75% or more on their exam to be selected for the job. As a result, only 3 of the 21 candidates were selected. The results presented below represent records from the entire database, which includes case law, legislation, articles, news, etc. Do retroactive decisions in the selection of positions contravene sections 14 and 16? Honourable Justices: Govind Mathur, Pushpendra Singh Bhati A 5-judge constitutional panel headed by Justice Indira Banerjee and composed of Judges H. Gupta, S. Kant, M.M.
Sundresh and S. Dhulia heard the case on 30 August 2022. They listed the issue for conclusive arguments of 6. September 2022. Three unsuccessful candidates challenged the decision of the Chief Justice of Rajasthan HC. However, Rajasthan HC dismissed the case on 11 March 2010. The unsuccessful candidates filed an application with the Supreme Court on 21 April 2011 in which they appealed Rajasthan HC`s decision. A 3-man bench composed of Judges R.M. Lodha, J. Chelameshwar and M.B.
Lokur heard the case. petitioners: Tej Prakash Pathak; Manoj Rai; Mahipal Singh Aashiya lawyers: Karan Singh Bhati; Devendra Singh; Vivek Narayan Sharma.