In Brief
The appellant, recommended for an Assistant Professor position in the OBC category, appealed against a High Court order that added five marks for publications to the respondent's score. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal but on different grounds. It found that the University's separate interviews for general and OBC categories were procedurally invalid and that inconsistent application of marking criteria rendered the selection process unfair. The Court directed a fresh selection process with a unified merit list of all candidates, emphasizing that experts must apply criteria uniformly while maintaining proper reservation principles.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.