SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. KHANWILKAR, INDU MALHOTRA, AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.
RACHNA & ORS. – PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – RESPONDENT
Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 1410 of 2020
Decided On : 24-02-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 14, 19, 29 , 21, 32 and 142 - Civil services examination - Recruitment - Background facts delineated from records and relevant for purpose are that Civil Services Examination is conducted every year by 2nd respondent (Union Public Service Commission-UPSC) and for year, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) published Gazette Notification dated notifying rules for competitive examination, 2020(hereinafter being referred to as “Rules 2020”) to be held by 2nd respondent for purpose of recruitment to 24 services/posts to be held in three stages:(i) preliminary (ii) mains (iii) personality test - Scheme of Rules 2020 published is a complete code for purposes of final selection to civil services - Parameters prescribed for eligibility with regard to number of attempts and age have been provided under Rule 4 and Rule 6 of Rules 2020 - Rule 4 and Rule 6 which are relevant for purpose - Held, It has been brought to our notice that not only petitioners/intervenors before this Court, but there are large number of candidates who appeared in various examinations in year during Covid 19 pandemic and everyone must have faced some constraints/impediments/inconvenience in one way or other and this Court can take a judicial notice that these petitioners have appeared in same pattern of examination in previous years since year and what is being claimed and prayed for under guise of Covid 19 pandemic is nothing but a lame excuse in taking additional attempt to participate in Civil Service Examination 2021 to be held in future a - Court, however, make it clear that this decision would not restrict 1st respondent or executive in exercising its discretion in meeting out the nature of difficulties as being projected to this Court, if come across in future in dealing with situation, if required - Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
AJAY RASTOGI, J.
1. Application(s) for intervention are allowed.
2. The batch of petitioners were hopeful that in their last attempt, they may qualify in the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination, 2020 (in short “Examination 2020”) which was held on 4th October 2020 but when they failed to achieve their goal, approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition under 1st Article 32 of the Constitution seeking mandamus to the respondent to extend one additional attempt to the petitioners/intervenors as they are being barred from attempting the examination in future on account of exhausting of available attempts or on account of age bar subsequent to Examination 2020.
3. The prayer which has been made in the instant petition is as follows:
“(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and declare that the action of the respondents of not issuing appropriate policy for grant of an extra attempt to candidates for whom civil services examination 2020 would be last attempt as being violative of Articles 14, 19, 29 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and by way of issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction of or in the nature of mandamus, and/or any other writ, order or direction, interalia, direct the Respondent/s to provide one extra attempt to the last attempt candidates including the petitioners, in addition to number of permissible attempts: and/or
(b) Pass any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”
Brief Factual Matrix
4. The background facts delineated from the records and relevant for the purpose are that the Civil Services Examination is conducted every year by the 2nd respondent (Union Public Service Commission-UPSC) and for the year 2020, the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) published Gazette Notification dated 12th February, 2020 notifying the rules for competitive examination, 2020(hereinafter being referred to as “Rules 2020”) to be held by the 2nd respondent for the purpose of recruitment to 24 services/posts to be held in three stages:(i) preliminary (ii) mains (iii) personality test.
5. The scheme of Rules 2020 published on 12th February, 2020 is a complete code for the purposes of final selection to civil services. The parameters prescribed for eligibility with regard to number of attempts and age have been provided under Rule 4 and Rule 6 of the Rules 2020. Rule 4 and Rule 6 which are relevant for the purpose are mentioned hereunder:
“4. Every candidate appearing at the examination who is otherwise eligible, shall be permitted six attempts at the examination.
Provided that this restriction on the number of attempts will not apply in the case of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates who are otherwise eligible.
Provided further that the number of attempts permissible to candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes, who are otherwise eligible, shall be nine. The relaxation will be available to the candidates who are eligible to avail of reservation applicable to such candidates.
Provided further that candidates belonging to persons with benchmark disability will get as many attempts as are available to candidates other than persons with benchmark disability of his or her community, subject to the condition that a candidate of person with benchmark disability belonging to the General and EWS Category shall be eligible for nine attempts. Necessary action to make corresponding changes in respective Rules/regulations pertaining to various services is being taken separately. The relaxation will be available to the candidate of persons with benchmark disability who are eligible to avail of reservation applicable to such candidates.
Note:
(I) An attempt at a Preliminary
Limited interference with policy decisions and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on examinations.
Policy decisions regarding exam eligibility cannot be arbitrarily altered and must adhere to established criteria, even in unprecedented circumstances like a pandemic.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entitlement to age relaxation for appearing in recruitment examinations is subject to specific provisions and factual considerations, and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the government had already increased the maximum upper age limit by two years and the concession granted by the Supreme Court in a similar cas....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that age relaxation in the civil services examination is governed by statutory provisions, and candidates are not entitled to age relaxation de hor....
The classification of candidates with disabilities for civil service attempts is lawful, distinguishing between SC/ST and OBC categories, affirming that policy decisions do not violate equality right....
The classification of PwBD candidates in Civil Services Examination Rules is valid, allowing different number of attempts for SC/ST and OBC categories, reflecting a legitimate policy decision.
The classification of PwBD candidates in the Civil Services Examination Rules is valid, allowing different treatment for SC/ST and OBC candidates regarding the number of attempts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.