LexRAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION versus LAVANSHU SANKHLA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2026] 5 S.C.R. 290 : 2026 INSC 444 Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 7026 of 2026) 04 May 2026 [Vikram Nath* and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the relevant date for acquiring the minimum essential qualification is the date of submission of the application pursuant to the advertisement, or any time prior to the commencement of the interview process. Headnotes† Service Law – Assistant Prosecution Officer Examination – Minimum essential qualification – Appellant-Rajasthan Public Service Commission issued an advertisement inviting applications for the posts of Assistant Prosecution Officer – Essential qualification included degree in law – The respondents submitted their online application forms – On the date of submission of the applications, the respondents had not acquired their degree and were yet to appear in the final year examination – A press note dated 29.11.2024 issued by the appellant-RPSC clarified that candidates who had not acquired the requisite qualification as on the date of the selection examination, were not eligible to participate in the selection process – Writ petitions – The High Court directed the appellant-RPSC to issue admit cards to the writ petitioners and permit them to appear in the preliminary examination – Correctness: Held: A conjoint reading of the advertisement and the governing rules makes it evident that the relevant date for determining eligibility, including educational qualification, is the date of submission of the application – This is for the reason that the eligibility of a candidate is assessed on the basis of the particulars and documents furnished at the time of application, and there is * Author [2026] 5 S.C.R. 291 Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors. no provision for subsequent supplementation or re-submission of such documents at a later stage – The Rule 12 of Rajasthan Prosecution Subordinate Service Rules, 1978 earlier contained a proviso granting exemption to candidates who had appeared or were appearing in the final year examination of the course – However, it is pertinent to note that the aforesaid proviso to Rule 12, came to be deleted by respondent no. 2-State – The legislative intent underlying such deletion is clear and unambiguous, namely, that candidates who have not acquired the requisite educational qualification as on the relevant date are not eligible to apply for the post in question – The requirement in the advertisement that a candidate must “possess” a Degree in Law (Professional) or an integrated Law degree from a recognised university necessarily excludes those candidates who are yet to acquire such qualification or who may acquire it at a future date – The prescribed eligibility condition unequivocally requires possession of the degree at the relevant point of time – The press note dated 29.11.2024 is in complete consonance with the Rajasthan Prosecution Subordinate Service Rules, 1978 and the advertisement dated 07.03.2024 and merely clarifies the position that eligibility must be determined with reference to the date of submission of the application. [Paras 18-20, 23, 25] Maxim – Aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliquum: Held: What cannot be done directly cannot be permitted to be done indirectly – The said principle embodies the rule that what is expressly prohibited by law cannot be circumvented through indirect means. [Para 21] List of Acts Rajasthan Prosecution Subordinate Service Rules, 1978. List of Keywords Service Law; Assistant Prosecution Officer Examination; Minimum essential qualification; Law degree; Aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliquum; Application form; Advertisement; Time of application; Re-submission of documents; Rule 12 of Rajasthan Prosecution Subordinate Service Rules, 1978. 292 [2026] 5 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7026 of 2026 From the Judgment and Order dated 12.08.2025 of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in DBSAW No. 169 of 2025. With Civil Appeal No(s). 7027, 7028, 7029, 7030, 7031, 7032, 7033 of 2026. Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant(s): Yuvraj Samant, Ms. Nehal Amola, Ms. Neha Amola, Rajesh Singh Chauhan. Advs. for the Respondent(s): Siddhartha Jha, Nikhil Purohit, Harpreet Singh Gupta, Jatin Lalwani, Sandeep Malik, Ms. Arzoo K
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.