CASE DETAILS v. UNION OF INDIA & Ors.

Held: Determination of eligibility cannot be left uncertain till the fi nal stages of selection, since that would lead to uncertainty – Further, if rules prescribe the last date on which eligibility should be possessed, any relaxation would prejudice non-applicants who for want of possession of eligibility would not have applied – Relaxation would then be selective, leading to discrimination – In the present case, rules clearly exist in the form of CSE-2022 – As is clear from r.13, by 15.07.2022, the certifi cates disclosing eligibility had to be uploaded with Detailed Application Form–I (DAF-I) and it was expressly stipulated that delayed submission of the DAF-I or documents in support will not be allowed – Further, much water has also fl own under the bridge – The UPSC has made the cadre allocations and the EWS candidates against the 298 vacancies have also been allotted their respective cadres – Accepting the contention of the petitioners would also result in administrative chaos and will prolong the selection process indefi nitely – It is legally not permissible and administratively not feasible for the UPSC – Civil Services Examination Rules, 2022 – r.13 . [Paras 51-53] Service Law – Appointment/Recruitment/Selection – Decision of the Selecting Body – Interference with – Impermissible – Petitioners argued that with regard to four candidates there was relaxation inasmuch as they were allowed to rectify the defects in the EWS and I&AC: 48 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 15 S.C.R. Held: UPSC considered these omissions as trivial and as not going to the root of the eligibility, unlike in the case of the petitioners herein – In the present case, it did not consider the defects as insignifi cant – Thus, this Court has no option but to reject the writ petitions of all the petitioners – Neither the Offi ce Memorandum nor the rules in question can be construed as directory – They clearly prescribe the eligibility criterion, the date before which the certifi cate should be possessed and submitted – They also prescribe the consequence for the omission – The petitioners who did not possess the valid documentation determining their eligibility, before the prescribed cut-off date, cannot complain, if their claim for categorization as EWS was rejected – UPSC justifi ed in denying the petitioners the benefi t of categorization as EWS candidates – Civil Services Examination Rules, 2022. [Paras 74, 78, 80 and 81] Constitution of India – Article 142 – Power under – When not to be exercised – Petitioners contended that in the event of this Court upholding the Rules and the action of the UPSC, it should exercise its power u/Article 142 and to do complete justice, the Petitioners should be treated as an EWS category Candidate: Held: Petitioners cannot be granted refuge u/Article 142 – In the present case, by the rightful application of the OM and the CSE-Rules 2022, complete justice has been done to all – Exercise of power u/Article 142 should be done with great caution and circumspection – The present case is not the one warranting the invocation of that power – Civil Services Examination Rules, 2022. [Para 85] Words and Phrases – “eligible” – Meaning – Discussed – Civil Services Examination Rules, 2022. [Para 44] LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES Ram Kumar Gijroya vs.

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr. (2016) 4 SCC 754; Charles K. Skaria & Others vs. Dr. C. Mathew & Others [1980] 3 SCR 71 : (1980) 2 SCC 752; Deepak Yadav & Others vs. Union Public Service Commission and Another (2021) SCC OnLine SC 709; Dolly Chhanda vs. Chairman, JEE and Others [2004] 5 Suppl. SCR 79 : (2005) 9 SCC 779; Dheerender Singh Paliwal vs. Union Public Service DIVYA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 49