Supreme Court says recruitment rules cannot be amended midway
Says if change in eligibility criteria is permitted under rules or advertisement, the change will have to satisfy the test of non-arbitrariness
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday said that recruitment rules cannot be amended midway after the selection process has commenced, unless provided otherwise in the extant rules or the recruitment advertisement.
A Constitution Bench, headed by CJI, DY Chandrachud, said that an appointing authority, in absence of rules to the contrary, can devise a procedure for selection of a candidate suitable to the post and may set different benchmarks for different stages of the recruitment process.
“However, if any such benchmark is set, the same should be set before the commencement of the recruitment process. But, if the rules empower the competent authority to set benchmarks at different stages of the recruitment process, then such benchmarks may be set before that stage is reached so that neither candidates nor invigilators are taken by surprise,” ruled the five-judge Constitution Bench.
The Bench, also comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha, Pankaj Mithal and Manoj Misra, said that if change in eligibility criteria is permitted under rules or advertisement, the change will have to satisfy the test of non-arbitrariness.
It said, “The object of any process of selection for entry into public service is to ensure that a person suitable for the post is selected. What is suitable for one post cannot be for another. Thus, a degree of discretion is necessary to be left to the employer to devise a method to select a candidate most suitable for the post.”
In its judgment, the top court stressed the recruiting bodies, subject to the extant rules, may devise appropriate procedure for bringing the recruitment process to its logical end, provided that the procedure adopted is transparent, non-discriminatory, non-arbitrary and has a rational nexus to the objects sought to be achieved.
The Constitution Bench was hearing a reference after a three-judge Bench doubted the correctness of an earlier decision, where it was held that the selection criteria cannot be changed midway during the recruitment process.
