RAMJIT SINGH KARDAM & ORS. versus SANJEEV KUMAR & ORS.

Citation: [2020] 7 S.C.R. 1096 · Decided: 08-04-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 11 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1096
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 7 S.C.R.
RAMJIT SINGH KARDAM & ORS.
v.
SANJEEV KUMAR & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2103 of 2020)
APRIL 08, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.]
Service Law: Selection process – Criteria for selection –
Challenged by candidates – Rule of estoppel – Applicability of – It
is a general preposition that a candidate, who participates in a
selection without a demur taking a calculated chance to get selected
cannot turn around and challenge the criteria of selection and the
constitution of the selection committee – However, in the instant
case, Commission had not published any criteria on the basis of
which candidates were to be subjected for selection process and
the candidates participated in the selection without knowing the
criteria of selection – In such situation, they cannot be shut out
from challenging the process of selection when ultimately they came
to know that Commission step by step had diluted the merit in
selection  – Further when the written examination as notified earlier
was scrapped and every eligible candidate was called for interview
giving a go bye to a fair and reasonable process for shortlisting the
candidates for interview, that too only by Chairman of the
Commission whereas decision regarding criteria of selection was to
be taken by Commission, the candidates have every right to challenge
the entire selection process so conducted – Rule of estoppel.
Service Law: Selection process – Decision to cancel the
written examination and to call the candidates for interview eight
times number of vacancies on minimum percentage of marks as fixed
therein and a subsequent decision to call all the eligible candidates
for interview – Propriety of – Held: These decisions were arbitrary
decision to change the selection criteria which have effect of
downgrading the merit in the selection – The present is a case where
change in criteria was affected and altered arbitrarily with the object
of down-grading and not up-grading the standards of selection.
Service Law: Haryana Staff Selection Commission – Selection
for the post of PTI – Criteria for selection – Power vested in
[2020] 7 S.C.R. 1096
1096
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1097
Commission to fix the criteria for selection – By notification dated
28.07.1998, the Commission was empowered to devise the mode of
selection and fix the criteria for selection of post for which
requisition is sent to it by a Department or an office, as it may deem
appropriate – As per notification dated 21.06.2007, the Commission
is to consist of nine members including the Chairman – The selection
on various posts was to be conducted as per the criteria fixed by
the Commission – There are no separate statutory rules providing
for criteria for recruitment for different posts including the post of
PTI.
Service Law: Haryana Staff Selection Commission – Multi-
member body – Decisions taken by the Chairman – Binding effect –
Held: The statutory notifications when entrust the Commission to
devise the mode of selection and fix the criteria and the Commission
being multi-member body, Chairman alone was not competent to
alter the mode of selection and the criteria, which was fixed and
published for conducting the selection for the post of PTI – The
Commission being a multi-member body, all decisions pertaining to
mode of selection and criteria was to be taken by the Commission
itself, there being no rules or resolution delegating the said power
to Chairman or any other member – The decision of not holding
written examination, decision to screen on the basis of eight times
of vacancies and percentage of marks and decision to call all
eligible candidates, were all decisions taken by the Chairman himself,
which decisions cannot be said to be decisions of the Commission.
Service Law – Selection process – Posts of PTI – Staff Selection
Commission, a multi-member body – Decision of Chairman of the
Commission to change selection process i.e. not to hold the written
examination due to “administrative reasons” – As per the
advertisement for the selection of posts of PTI, the Commission had
published the criteria for selection on 28.12.2006 which was
implemented also– The decision for not holding the written
examination and steps taken consequent thereto were all arbitrary
decisions, unsustainable in law – Power to device the mode of
selection and fix the criteria for selection was entrusted on the
Commission to further the object of selection on merit to fill up post
in S

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.