Supreme Court
Cancellation Of Selection Process After Its Completion And Preparation Of Final Selection List Is Impermissible: SC
Supreme Court

Cancellation Of Selection Process After Its Completion And Preparation Of Final Selection List Is Impermissible: SC

Riya Rathore
|
5 Oct 2024 6:45 AM GMT

The Supreme Court held that the cancellation of the entire selection process after its completion and preparation of the final list is impermissible.

The Court stated that changing the said process would effectively change the “rules of the game after the game was played” which was impermissible and deprived the candidates of their legitimate right of consideration under the previous Rules. The Bench directed the Bihar government to revise the selection list for the Junior Engineer (Civil) recruitment process issued by the Bihar Technical Service Commission (BTSC).

A Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma held, “Presently, despite the preparation of the Final Select List which signals the conclusion of the appointment process, the State Government seeks to scrap the entire process and undertake a fresh appointment process under the New Rules. In the considered opinion of this Court, this amounts to effectively changing the rules of the game after the game was played which is impermissible and deprives the candidates of their legitimate right of consideration under the previous Rules.

Senior Advocates Rajeev Dhavan, Ranjit Kumar and Meenakshi Arora represented the appellant, while Senior Advocate P.S. Patwalia appeared for the respondents.

The educational qualifications under the advertisement required a Diploma in Civil Engineering from institutions recognised by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). This was drawn from Rule 9(1)(iii) of the Bihar Water Resources Department Subordinate Engineering (Civil) Cadre Recruitment Rules, 2015 (amended in 2017) [Recruitment Rules].

This requirement was challenged on the grounds that the appellants obtained diplomas from private universities approved by the University Grants Commission (UGC) but not AICTE, which should be considered valid.

The Supreme Court noted, “As evidenced above, the present case has a chequered history. Before the Advertisement was released, an amendment was brought to the Rules in 2017, more particularly to Rule 9, which restricted the eligibility criteria only to those candidates who possessed a Diploma from an institute approved by the AICTE.”

Despite the preparation of the Final Select List which signalled the conclusion of the appointment process, the Court noted that the State Government sought to scrap the entire process and undertake a fresh appointment process under the New Rules. “In the considered opinion of this Court, this amounts to effectively changing the rules of the game after the game was played which is impermissible and deprives the candidates of their legitimate right of consideration under the previous Rules,” the Court held.

The Court directed, “Hence, it is required to be directed that a fresh selection list for the vacancies advertised in the Advertisement dated 08.03.2019 be prepared of the meritorious candidates, considering the above observations and in compliance with the order passed by the High Court as expedient as possible and preferably within three months of this order.

Consequently, the Court held that “the State action of scrapping the entire selection process is not permissible. In view of the peculiar circumstances of this case, particularly the prolonged pendency leading to huge number of vacant posts that hinder the Government’s functioning, this Court finds it appropriate for the State/BTSC to proceed with the Fresh Select List.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal.

Cause Title: Shashi Bhushan Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 763)

Appearance:

Senior Advocates Rajeev Dhavan, Ranjit Kumar, P.S. Patwalia, Rudreshwar Singh, and Meenakshi Arora; AOR Manika Tripathy, Manoj Kumar Srivastava, Azmat Hayat Amanullah, Gopal Singh, Smarhar Singh, Gopal Singh, Prem Prakash, Yadav Narender Singh, Harish Pandey, Vanya Gupta and Neeraj Shekhar; Advocates Ashutosh Kaushik, Barun Dey, Rebecca Mishra, Shivam Singh, Suyash Vyas, Shweta Kumari, Manoj Kumar, Vineeta Singh, Aditya Harsh, Anil Soni, Aditya Vaibhav Singh and Kshama Sharma

Click here to read/download the Judgment



Similar Posts