सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला criteria for govt jobs cannot be changed midway
सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला criteria for govt jobs cannot be changed midway
The bench said that the selection rules should not be arbitrary. It should be in accordance with Article 14 of the Constitution. The apex court unanimously said that transparency and non-discrimination should be the hallmark of the public recruitment process.
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court gave a major decision on Thursday regarding the rules of the selection process for government jobs. The Supreme Court said that the recruitment rules for appointment to government jobs cannot be changed midway. This cannot be done at all unless it is determined.
Actually, the court was giving its verdict on the question whether the state and its institutions can change the rules of the selection process for jobs after the process has started. A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said that the rules once decided before the recruitment process starts cannot be changed midway. The bench also comprised Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Manoj Mishra.
The bench said that the selection rules should not be arbitrary. It should be in accordance with Article 14 of the Constitution. The apex court unanimously said that transparency and non-discrimination should be the hallmark of the public recruitment process. Candidates should not be confused by changing the rules midway.
The bench said that the recruitment process begins with the issuance of advertisements inviting applications and ends with the filling of vacancies. In such a situation, the eligibility criteria for being placed in the notified selection list in the recruitment process cannot be changed midway unless the existing rules allow it or the advertisement is contrary to the existing rules. If changes in the criteria under the existing rules or advertisement are allowed, then it will have to fulfill every requirement of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution and meet the test of not being arbitrari.
The apex court was responding to a question related to appointment criteria for government jobs referred to it by a three-judge bench in March 2013. Citing a 1965 judgment, the three-judge bench had said that it is a good principle that the State or its bodies should not be permitted to tinker with the "rules of the game" with regard to fixation of eligibility criteria. "Whether such a principle should be applied in the context of the "rules of the game" prescribing the procedure for selection, particularly when the change sought is to apply more rigorous scrutiny to selection, requires authoritative pronouncement by a larger bench of this Court," the bench had said.
The bench said that the recruitment process begins with the issuance of advertisements inviting applications and ends with the filling of vacancies. In such a situation, the eligibility criteria for being placed in the notified selection list in the recruitment process cannot be changed midway unless the existing rules allow it or the advertisement is contrary to the existing rules. If changes in the criteria under the existing rules or advertisement are allowed, then it will have to fulfill every requirement of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution and meet the test of not being arbitrari.
The apex court was responding to a question related to appointment criteria for government jobs referred to it by a three-judge bench in March 2013. Citing a 1965 judgment, the three-judge bench had said that it is a good principle that the State or its bodies should not be permitted to tinker with the "rules of the game" with regard to fixation of eligibility criteria. "Whether such a principle should be applied in the context of the "rules of the game" prescribing the procedure for selection, particularly when the change sought is to apply more rigorous scrutiny to selection, requires authoritative pronouncement by a larger bench of this Court," the bench had said.
Post a Comment