New Delhi, Nov 7 (FN Bureau) The Supreme Court on Thursday held that the “Rules of the Game” in recruitment process cannot be changed midway unless explicitly allowed by the existing rules. The five-Judge Constitution bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr. DY Chandrachud, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice Pankaj Mithal, and Justice Manoj Misra, clarified that the boundaries of recruitment regulations, ensured procedural integrity and adherence to fairness as mandated by Article 14 of the Constitution. The bench had reserved its judgment on July 18, 2023. The Constitution Bench was tasked to look into the much-needed clarity and the importance of stability and predictability in recruitment rules, aligning with constitutional safeguards and reinforcing procedural fairness in government recruitments.
Justice Misra, writing for the bench, outlined the following steps to be taken during recruitment. He said the recruitment process should begin with an advertisement inviting applicants to fill vacancies. Then have fixed eligibility criteria, the bench said. “Eligibility standards established at the onset cannot be altered midway unless explicitly permitted by existing rules or the advertisement itself, provided it aligns with the rules,” Justice Mishra added.Requirement of Non-Arbitrariness-Any permissible changes must comply with Article 14 of the Constitution and meet the standard of non-arbitrariness. The Court said, “the decision in K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008) is upheld as good law and aligns with previous judgments, reinforcing that altering criteria midway is impermissible.
Recruiting authorities may adopt any lawful procedure to conclude the recruitment process, provided it is transparent, rational, and serves the intended objective, the bench held.The Bench held that the statutory rules on procedure and eligibility are binding. If rules are absent or silent, administrative instructions can fill procedural gaps. No Indefeasible Right to Appointment, Placement in a select list does not guarantee appointment, but available vacancies cannot be arbitrarily withheld from eligible candidates. The bench addressed this issue following a reference from Tej Prakash Pathak & Others v. Rajasthan High Court (2013), where a three-judge bench questioned the ruling in Manjusree that prohibited changing recruitment criteria mid-process. The Manjusree case annulled a post hoc interview cutoff introduction, viewing it as a violation of fixed criteria.