Supreme Court Stays Allahabad High Court Order on Eligibility for Assistant General Manager (Legal) Post

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: 17 September 2021
Citation: (2021) INSC 611
Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J., Bela M. Trivedi, J.
Can a High Court direct a re-evaluation of candidates’ eligibility for a job after the selection process is over? This question was at the heart of a recent case before the Supreme Court of India. The case involved the Food Corporation of India (FCI) and several candidates who applied for the post of Assistant General Manager (Legal). The Supreme Court addressed the legality of the Allahabad High Court’s interim order that directed the FCI to re-verify the eligibility of the candidates. The bench comprised Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, and Bela M. Trivedi.

Case Background

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) initiated a selection process for 13 posts of Assistant General Manager (Legal) through an advertisement on January 8, 2011. Later, the number of posts was increased to 17. The eligibility criteria for the post required candidates to have a law degree from a recognized university, along with either five years of experience in legal work in the Central/State Government or a Public/Private Sector Undertaking, or three years of practice at the Bar. For those with Bar experience, it was mandatory to provide a certificate from the Bar Council/Association and evidence of having represented at least five matters per year.

Manoj Kumar Srivastava, the first respondent, applied for the position but did not provide any details regarding his experience in the application form. Despite this, he was successful in the written test and interview. However, his candidature was rejected by the FCI because he did not meet the required eligibility criteria. Following this rejection, Mr. Srivastava filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Several other candidates also filed similar writ petitions.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The Allahabad High Court, through an interim order dated August 21, 2018, directed the Deputy General Manager (RPI) of the FCI to notify a date within four to six weeks, calling upon the petitioners and other interested applicants to submit evidence to demonstrate that they fulfilled the eligibility criteria on the last date of application. The High Court also directed the FCI to prepare a chart disclosing whether the candidates had submitted the required evidence. This interim order was challenged by the FCI before the Supreme Court.

Legal Framework

The core of the dispute revolves around the interpretation and application of the eligibility criteria set by the FCI for the post of Assistant General Manager (Legal). The advertisement specified that candidates must have:
✓ A degree in Law from a recognized university.
✓ At least five years of experience in legal work in Central/State Government or a Public/Private Sector Undertaking, OR three years of practice at the Bar.

For candidates with Bar experience, the advertisement further required:
✓ A certificate from the concerned Bar Council/Association.
✓ Evidence that the candidate has represented in at least five matters per year while practicing at the Bar.

Arguments

The arguments presented before the Supreme Court focused on the legality and propriety of the Allahabad High Court’s interim order.

Arguments by the Appellants (Food Corporation of India)

• The appellants argued that the High Court’s interim order was unwarranted because it directed a re-evaluation of candidates’ eligibility after the selection process had already been completed.
• The appellants contended that the candidates were required to furnish all necessary details and documents at the time of application, and any subsequent attempt to submit evidence was not permissible.
• The appellants highlighted that a similar challenge to the same advertisement had been rejected by the High Court of Delhi.

Arguments by the Respondents (Manoj Kumar Srivastava & Ors.)

• The respondents argued that the High Court’s interim order was necessary to ensure that all candidates who met the eligibility criteria were given a fair chance.
• The respondents contended that they had the necessary experience and qualifications but were not given an opportunity to demonstrate this to the FCI.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues but considered the core question of whether the Allahabad High Court’s interim order directing the re-evaluation of candidates’ eligibility was justified.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues

Authorities

The Supreme Court did not cite any specific cases or legal provisions in this order. The primary focus was on the procedural impropriety of the High Court’s interim order.

Judgment

The Supreme Court, while not going into the merits of the case, observed that the interim directions issued by the Allahabad High Court were not called for. The Court emphasized that the candidates were required to submit all necessary documents and details at the time of application and that a re-evaluation after the selection process was complete was not permissible. The Supreme Court stayed the operation of the High Court’s interim order and requested the High Court to dispose of the pending writ petitions as early as possible, preferably within six months.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the procedural impropriety of the Allahabad High Court’s interim order. The Court emphasized that the candidates were required to submit all necessary documents and details at the time of application, and a re-evaluation after the selection process was not permissible. The Court’s focus was on maintaining the integrity of the selection process and preventing unnecessary delays.

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court emphasized that candidates must submit all necessary documents and details at the time of application.
• Interim orders directing re-evaluation of candidates’ eligibility after the selection process is complete are generally not permissible.
• The integrity of the selection process must be maintained.
• High Courts are expected to dispose of pending cases expeditiously.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that the interim order passed by the Court staying the operation of the directions issued by the High Court, shall be the interim order during the pendency of challenge before the High Court.

The Supreme Court requested the High Court to consider disposing of the pending writ petitions as early as possible and preferably within six months of the receipt of the copy of this order.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that the High Court should not pass interim orders that direct re-evaluation of eligibility criteria of candidates after the selection process is complete. This judgment reinforces the importance of submitting all necessary documents and details at the time of application and upholds the integrity of the selection process.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case underscores the importance of adhering to the prescribed procedures in selection processes. The Court’s stay on the Allahabad High Court’s interim order highlights the principle that re-evaluations after the selection process are generally not permissible. The judgment also emphasizes the need for timely disposal of cases by the High Courts.