The Delhi High Court has made it clear: belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe category does not, by itself, secure relaxation of eligibility conditions in government recruitment.
In a ruling delivered by a Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan, the Court held that while the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) may relax criteria for SC/ST candidates, such flexibility is discretionary — not a right candidates can demand.
The case arose from a challenge to the rejection of a law graduate’s application for the post of prosecutor in the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). The candidate, who belonged to the Scheduled Tribe category, argued that his experience and additional documents — submitted after the application deadline — should have been considered, particularly in light of the relaxation clause.
The Court disagreed.
Experience Must Match the Role
The recruitment notification issued in 2022 sought applications for 20 prosecutor posts, requiring at least two years of litigation experience. The candidate cited over two years of work at a law firm. However, the Court noted that much of his work involved drafting and vetting commercial contracts, not appearing in court.
That distinction proved decisive.
The Bench observed that a prosecutor’s duties involve assisting in prosecutions and filing complaints before courts. Litigation experience, therefore, was not a decorative requirement — it was central to the job’s functional demands. The recruiting body’s assessment that the candidate’s experience did not meet this threshold was neither arbitrary nor irrational, the Court said.
Cut-Off Dates Are Not Casual
The candidate had attempted to bolster his credentials after the deadline by submitting fresh certificates. But the Court underscored the “sanctity” of the cut-off date, warning that allowing candidates to supplement qualifications later would erode fairness.
Opening the door to post-deadline improvements, the judges noted, would inject uncertainty into the process and undermine equality principles under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Discretion Is Not a Promise
While the recruitment notification empowered UPSC to relax eligibility norms for SC/ST candidates, the Court clarified that such provisions do not create an enforceable entitlement. Simply belonging to a reserved category does not compel the authority to dilute essential requirements — especially where the core qualifications remain unmet.
With that, the Court declined to interfere and upheld the earlier decision dismissing the candidate’s plea.
The message from the Bench was firm: discretion may exist, but it is not an automatic concession — and eligibility cannot be retrofitted after the clock runs out.
