Eligibility criteria can’t be relaxed unless envisioned in rules/advertisement, says SC

Satya Prakash

Advertisement

New Delhi, November 17

Holding that eligibility criteria set out in rules can’t be relaxed unless such relaxation is envisaged in the advertisement, the Supreme Court has set aside the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s directions with regard to recruitment of Junior Office Assistant (Information Technology), Class-III, (Non-Gazetted), for which applications were invited in 2015.

A Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Misra said in case any such relaxation is made, it has to be widely publicised to be held valid.

The Himachal Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Board on February 13, 2015, invited applications for selection on 1421 post (s) of JOA (Post Code 447) prescribing same qualifications as in Rule 7 of the Himachal Pradesh, Department of Personnel, Junior Office Assistant (Information Technology), Class-III, (Non-Gazetted), Ministerial Services, Common Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2014.

The last date for submission of application was March 18, 2015. However, for residents of certain districts, it was April 2, 2015. But the date(s) were extended up to October 31, 2015. Clause 4 of the general conditions in the advertisement specifically provided that, “the candidate must fulfil/possess all the required essential educational and other qualifications mentioned against each code on or before the last date fixed for the receipt of application forms, Selection Board otherwise the candidature will be rejected at the time of Personal Interview.”

While the selection exercise under the Advertisement dated February 13, 2015 was ongoing, a fresh Advertisement was issued on October 18, 2016 by the Commission inviting applications for another set of 1156 posts of JOA (IT) with the same qualifications as prescribed under the 2014 Rules.

On August 21, 2017 the state Government relaxed the eligibility criteria and said candidates having one year Diploma in Computer or higher qualification in Computer Science/Application/IT from any private

Institution be considered for final selection subject to having successfully passed their skill test.

But the top court declared that “The relaxation/clarificatory order dated 21.08.2017, as approved by the State cabinet on 18.09.2017, being after the last date fixed by the advertisements dated 13.02.2015 and dated 18.10.2016 for receipt of applications from candidates, is not legally sustainable…, particularly, when no opportunity was afforded to similarly placed persons, who might have been left out, to apply and compete with those candidates who, though not eligible as per the terms of the advertisement, had applied thereunder.”

Accordingly, it set aside the directions contained in the high court’s judgment for the closure of the selection process for Post Code 556 and to re-cast the merit list as well as fill up remaining posts of Post Code 556, with the aid of relaxation/clarification dated August 21, 2017/September 18, 2017 read with communication dated March 19, 2018, after segregating it from those advertised as Post Code 817.

“In consequence, (a) the merit list prepared under the second Special Leave Petition (C) No. 730 of 2022 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 dated 21.08.2017 / 18.09.2017 read with communication dated 19.03.2018; and (b) there shall be no segregation of seats advertised under the third ad-vertisement dated 21.09.2020 for Post Code 817.  Thus, recruitment for Post Code 817 shall be strictly in accordance with the extant Rules (i.e., 2020 Rules), as notified,” it said.

The top court, however, clarified that “The appointments already made under the first advertisement (for Post Code 447) shall not be disturbed merely because some of the appointees may have gained eligibility based on the order of relaxation/clarification dated 21.08.2017, which was approved by the State cabinet.”