The Supreme Court has ruled that recruitment bodies cannot alter selection criteria after the final evaluation stage. The judgment, involving JKSSB’s Forester recruitment, reinforces fairness and prohibits changing the “rules of the game” post-interviews.
Introduction
In a significant ruling reinforcing fairness in public recruitment, the Supreme Court of India has held that selection criteria cannot be altered once the final stage of evaluation is completed. The judgment came in an appeal filed by the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB), challenging a High Court direction related to the recruitment of Forester posts.
A Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Prasanna B. Varale dismissed the Board’s appeal and upheld the High Court’s order, observing that modifying the evaluation scheme after interviews had been conducted amounted to an unfair alteration of the “rules of the game.”
Background: Recruitment for 38 Forester Posts
The JKSSB had issued a notification to fill 38 Forester vacancies, prescribing:
- Minimum qualification: 10+2 with Science
- Specified physical standards
As recruitment rules were not in place, the Board designed an evaluation scheme that awarded 25 marks for candidates possessing a B.Sc. Forestry degree.
However, after the interview stage was completed, the Board revised the criteria by differentiating between:
- 3-year B.Sc. Forestry degree – 20 marks
- 4-year B.Sc. Forestry degree – 25 marks
This post-interview modification directly impacted candidates with 3-year degrees, even though both degrees were recognized and all candidates met the minimum eligibility.
Legal Challenge Before the High Court
Candidates holding the 3-year degree challenged the revised criteria, arguing that:
- Changing the evaluation pattern after interviews violated settled legal principles.
- All degree-holders met the same minimum eligibility requirement (10+2 with Science).
- Revising criteria post-evaluation unfairly affected their chances of selection.
A Single Judge initially dismissed their petition. However, the Division Bench allowed the intra-court appeal, ruling that the evaluation process could not be altered once the interviews were over and only the preparation of the final select list remained.
Supreme Court’s Decision: No Changing “Rules of the Game”
Upholding the Division Bench decision, the Supreme Court held:
- Altering the criteria after the final interview stage is impermissible.
- The Board’s decision to split the B.Sc. Forestry degree into 3-year and 4-year categories was an unlawful and arbitrary modification.
- Such post-evaluation changes adversely affect candidates and undermine fairness in recruitment.
- The principles laid down in the Constitution Bench ruling Tej Prakash Pathak v. High Court of Rajasthan (2024 SC 864) were applicable.
The Court therefore affirmed that the High Court was right to intervene, as the Board had changed the selection criteria at the final stage, which could not be legally sustained.
Key Takeaways
- Recruitment authorities cannot change selection criteria after the evaluation process is complete.
- Any modification that affects candidate eligibility or marks allocation must be notified before the selection begins.
- Courts will step in to safeguard transparency and fairness in public employment.
- This judgment strengthens judicial safeguards against arbitrary administrative decisions in recruitment processes.
Supreme Court Ruling: Judicial Officers with Combined Experience Can Apply for District Judge Posts
