Each question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the object of this section to test your knowledge of law.

PRINCIPLE: One of the principles of natural justice Nemo judex in causa sua, which means that no one should be a judge in his Own cause. In other words, no person can judge a case in which he has an interest.

FACTS: 'X', a member of the selection board for a government service, was also a candidate for selection for the same service. 'X' did not take part in the deliberations of the board when his name was considered and approved.

Correct Answer: Selection of 'X' is against the principle of natural justice,

Step-by-Step Explanation:

1. Understanding the Principle:
The principle stated is Nemo judex in causa sua, which is a fundamental rule of natural justice meaning "no one should be a judge in his own cause." It lays down that no individual can sit in judgment or participate in a decision-making process in which they have a personal, pecuniary, or professional interest.

2. Analyzing the Facts:
- 'X' is a member of the selection board tasked with choosing candidates for a government service.
- 'X' is also a candidate competing for selection in that exact same service.
- 'X' did not participate in board deliberations specifically when his own name was considered and approved.

3. Applying the Principle to the Facts:
Even though 'X' recused himself from the deliberations when his own application was evaluated, his presence on the selection committee as a whole creates a real likelihood or apprehension of bias. As a member of the board, 'X' participates in evaluating rival candidates for the same post. Being both an evaluator of competitors and an applicant for the same position creates a direct conflict of interest, violating the rule against bias.
Merely stepping out during the consideration of one's own name does not cure the fundamental defect of a candidate serving on the board that selects candidates for that post.

4. Conclusion:
Therefore, the selection of 'X' violates the principle of natural justice. The correct statement is Selection of 'X' is against the principle of natural justice,.