Delhi Judicial Services Examination 2015 - Injustice within the precints of justice.

0 have signed. Let’s get to 200!


Hi. We're a group of about 15 students who have had a close call at the Delhi Judiciary Services Examination conducted by Delhi High court, the way of conducting these examinations, the marking criteria everything about this finest Judiciary in the country has been in question ever since. Every year a lot of sincere and hardworking candidates become a victim of this arbitrariness, to showcase a few irregularities:

1. The result of this year's Delhi Judiciary Mains result was delayed by an enormous amount of ONE year. Delay in results is tantamount to Denial of Opportunity. Present DJS procedure, is a culmination of 5 years of hard work and patience of many hardworking innocent and honest people. Those who have waited patiently 2 years since the last notification and further during the procedure of Delhi Judicial Services 2015 since Notification to Mains itself, about 2 years have gone by. Delhi has one of the lowest judges to population ratio in the world and deteriorating law and order situation is apparent. The delay has far-reaching consequences, even to the extent that for most of us, it might be our last time, testing our fates at the judiciary exams. Our circumstances, the time, the eligibility, the qualification criteria might not be on our sides the next time, as much.

2. To add to our miseries, arbitrary absolute cut offs for interview qualification are applied, the protocol followed by the High court is to call examinees three times the number of seats notified for the Viva Voce. However the other condition of minimum 50% marks in aggregate and 40% in its subject has to be met and as things stand right now anyone who gets above 40% in each of the 4 papers and minimum of 50% overall will be called for the interview. This method is flawed because it fails to realize that merit is not determined by arbitrary absolute “standards” but by relative “rankings”.

3. This year the candidate who has got highest marks, 493, in the result declared by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on July 12, 2017, Charu  Dhankhar at St. No. 770 has been found “NOT QUALIFIED”, considering she did not have adequate marks to qualify the 40% criteria in Criminal Law. Similarly, the candidate who has secured 3rd highest marks in aggregate, 480.50, Meenakshi Sharma at St. No. 791, has also been declared “NOT QUALIFIED”, while a candidate at St. No. 826, scoring 489.5, which is 3.5 marks less than Charu Dhankar has been declared as “QUALIFIED”, which is far from appreciation.

4. Victims of rigid marginalization: On objective appraisal, it has been found that policy of Delhi High Court in selection of candidates has been outright rigid and impractical that has resulted in defeating the very purpose of holding this examination. Comparative table of qualifying marks in aggregate and minimum qualifying marks in individual papers for UPSC and some of the neighboring states(for Lower Judiciary examinations) are self-illustrous of this fact.

5. Apparent arbitrariness

·         Absolute lack of Parity- On detailed observation it has been found that whereas there are only 25 candidates in Criminal Law getting more than 100 marks, 89 candidates in Civil law II, there are 182 such candidates in Civil law I, which depicts nothing but a sorry state of affairs since there has been hardly any parity at all.

Another observation is that, by and large, candidates have got comparatively lesser marks in Criminal Law and Civil Law II as compared to Civil Law I.

·         Absolutely strict checking- It is self explanatory that marking in Criminal law and Civil law II has been very strict vis a vis Civil law I which is not a welcome practice in competitive examinations where the candidates have to be provided a level playing field.

·         Lack of expertise and rationalization: Apparently the results seem to have been declared in some sort of hush, since an year had passed and the High Court appears to have been under pressure to declare the results at the earliest, while doing this, however an approach has been adopted which is fatal to the meritorious character, the results show that either no model answers were given for checking the answer copies to the examiner/examiners or expert knowledge was not put to use for checking the papers of each and every subject, it further appears either one examiner has checked all the papers or the papers were not rationalized by a Chief Examiner. Such procedure was explicitly laid down in Sanjay Singh [(2007) 3 SCC 720] and categorically was held to apply in the checking of papers in Judicial Services examination in Sujasha Mukherji v High Court of West Bengal [2015 AIR (SCW) 1582] which the Delhi High Court, is bound by Article 141 to follow this checking procedure in letter and spirit.

6. No right of revaluation: While we learn 'To err is to human, to not err is superhuman', a basic right such as that of even revaluation is denied to us. But what they fail to appreciate is the fact that to be a judicial services aspirant, a lot more than just time, money and resources of a person are at stake.

7. Lack of uniformity: A lot of sitting judges(some even rank holders) in other states have not been able to make it even near the qualifying criteria which goes on say a lot about the kind of system prevailing in the selection of judges by different states however for a judicial services aspirant a lot is at stake and thus, in all probability this little opportunity of getting his/her papers revaluated is the least that we can offer to him/her.

Needless to say, Delhi Judiciary attracts cream of candidates from the top law Institutions in the country. Many of them have been toppers/Gold Medalists in their respective institutions and Universities and to say that suitable candidates are not available to the Delhi High Court to fill up their vacancies out of such section is an insult to that section. 

By means of this petition we want to achieve the following:

 

1. We want to make people/aspirants/students thinking of taking up Judiciary as a career option to be aware of what they are getting into.

2. We're looking for an eminent advocate of high stature and profoundness, who works in public spirit willing to take up this case pro-bono to put forth the grievances before the SC of some really genuine, hardworking set of individuals. We want to make the process of taking Judicial examinations, a better experience. Interested advocates/people known to such advocates to please write to us at info.advocatesurbhi@gmail.com

3. Seeking support from people from and outside the profession in our cause specifically related to this DJS 2015 Examination i.e.

i. Revaluation of all mains papers of all the students should be done, so as to make the results streamlined.

ii. Anomalies, as apparent in evaluation of individual papers be removed so that the selection process is streamlined.

iii. The condition of minimum qualifying marks in individual subjects should be rationalized, the criteria be relaxed from 40% to 33% and an overall rationalization of the marks be done. 

In the overall 50% cut-off criteria, a rank based approach should be adopted.

iv. The interview process, dates for which are due to be announced anytime soon, be withheld till this issue is resolved.

4. Any other order to remedy the just grievances of candidates to redress and re-impose the faith of the candidates in the process of selection.

 

 



Today: Delhi Judicial Services Aspirants is counting on you

Delhi Judicial Services Aspirants needs your help with “Chief Justice of India: Delhi Judicial Services Examination 2015 - Injustice within the precints of justice.”. Join Delhi Judicial Services Aspirants and 185 supporters today.