Jahanvi Agarwal
In a recent legal development, the Supreme Court emphasized that while the State possesses the authority to ease eligibility criteria, such modifications cannot occur midway without adequate publicity of the changes and providing an opportunity for similarly situated candidates to apply and compete.
The court clarified that if the existing rules allow for relaxing eligibility criteria, this power can only be exercised if specified in the advertisement. The case in question pertained to the recruitment of Junior Office Assistants under the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
A two-judge bench comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Mishra addressed an appeal challenging the relaxation/clarification order approved by the State cabinet after the application deadline specified in the advertisements. The court ruled that such orders, without giving an opportunity to other potential candidates, were legally unsustainable.
The bench stated, “The merit list prepared under the second advertisement for Post Code 556 shall not be re-drawn by including such candidates who, though not eligible, became eligible pursuant to relaxation/clarificatory order.”
The background of the case involved recruitment for the Junior Office Assistant position, and the dispute arose when the government, after the application deadline, issued an order allowing candidates initially deemed ineligible to be considered. The Supreme Court emphasized that the power to relax eligibility criteria if it exists, must adhere to legal principles and constitutional mandates to avoid violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The court found that the relaxation order lacked the necessary publicity and extension of application deadlines, violating the principles of fairness. Additionally, it highlighted that the order providing equivalence to certain courses lacked empirical data and violated the constitutional mandate. The Supreme Court ruled that appointments made under the first advertisement would not be disturbed merely because some appointees gained eligibility based on subsequent relaxation orders.
In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of transparency, fairness, and adherence to legal principles in recruitment processes, ensuring equal opportunities for all eligible candidates.
Case Name: Ankita Thakur & Ors. V. The H.P. Staff Selection Commission & Ors.
Diary Number: 7602/2023
Bench: Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Mishra