Eligibility criteria for recruitment in public positions cannot be altered mid-selection without just cause; transparency and adherence to established procedures are essential to uphold fairness.

Order :

NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J.

1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in the bunch of these writ petitions, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The description and the field of experience of the petitioner in brief are extracted from the pleadings made in their respective petitions which as under:

(a) The petitioner in WP(S) No. 3775/2025 by profession is Generalist and as per pleadings made by him in the writ petition he has worked in various capacity in newspaper and Generals like Lokayat Patrika, Dainik Manas Varta, he has also involved in social works as detailed in the petition and has filed this petition wherein he has prayed for quashing of the decision of the respondent dated 09.05.2025 by which petitioner’s candidature for appointment on the post of State Information Commissioner has been rejected as he has not having 25 years of experience in the field and has prayed for considering candidature of petitioner for appointment on the post of Chief Information Commissioner.

(b) The petitioner in WP(S) No. 3844/2025 and 3845/2025 by profession is an advocate and he has 23 years experience in the field of law and he has prayed for quashing of the decision dated 09.05.2025 by the Committee by which petitioner’s candidature for appointment to the post of Chief Information Commissioner has been rejected.

(c) The petitioner in WP(S) No. 3811/2025 and 3815/2025 by profession is an advocate and having Ph.D. and he has 21 years experience in the field of law and has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment as State Information Commissioner and in WP(S) No. 3815/2025 he has prayed for quashing of the further proceedings of interview for appointment initiated by the Search Committee.

3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in WP(C) No. 436/2018 on 07.01.2025 directed all the States to initiate proceedings for appointment of State Information Commissioner and passed the following order:

“5. So far as the other States are concerned, we have perused their respective status reports. It seems that most of the States have initiated the selection process to fill up the vacancies, but without any commitment regarding the time line within which the appointments shall be made. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to issue the following directions to all the States (other than the State of Jharkhand):

i. The list of the applicants shall be notified within one week;

ii. The composition of the Search Committee along with the criteria prescribed for shortlisting applicants shall be notified within one week thereafter;

iii. The time line within which the interviews shall be completed be notified. This shall not be more than six weeks from the date of notification of composition of the Search Committee and the criteria for shortlisting applicants;

iv. On receipt of the recommendations, the competent authority shall scrutinize and make appointments within two weeks.

6. The Chief Secretaries of all the States shall file their respective compliance affidavits in this regard.

7. All the States shall, separately, find out the total vacancies for the respective ICs and the pendency of applications before the respective commissions. Such information shall also be furnished.

8. All those States, which have already made the required appointments and where there are no vacancies, are exempted from compliance with the above directions.”

4. Further facts of the case are that on 25.09.2022 for appoi