Chandigarh: Two recent judgments of the Punjab and Haryana high court on the contentious issue of socio-economic criteria in state govt recruitments have come as major relief affecting tens of thousands of govt job aspirants in Haryana.In one of the key rulings, the HC allowed review petitions filed by candidates selected under 24 different recruitment groups conducted by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC). The court restored the appointments of 10,233 candidates whose selections were earlier set aside following a broader judgment that invalidated the socio-economic criteria used in recruitment. Senior advocate Chetan Mittal, who represented candidates from these 24 groups in earlier proceedings, argued that the socio-economic criteria did not materially impact their selection and that they were wrongly grouped with other categories where such criteria had affected outcomes. The controversy is connected to the Common Eligibility Test (CET) recruitment process, where additional marks were awarded based on socio-economic factors. This criterion was struck down in an earlier judgment titled “Sukriti Malik case” in May 2024, with the court holding it violative of constitutional guarantees of equality under Articles 14 and 16. That ruling led to the cancellation of multiple recruitment processes and directions for fresh selection within six months. However, in its latest order dated March 27, the HC observed that the earlier decision had overlooked crucial distinctions between different recruitment groups. It held that candidates selected in the 24 groups were not materially affected by the socio-economic criteria and had already completed the selection process and joined service. The court further held that these candidates were not made parties to the earlier litigation, resulting in prejudice against them. It concluded that there was no evidence to show that socio-economic marks had impacted the merit list for these groups. On these grounds, the court allowed the review petitions and permitted the selected candidates to continue in service. In a parallel development, another set of review petitions challenging a 2025 judgment relating to recruitment advertisements issued in 2019 and 2021 has also been allowed. That earlier judgment invalidated selections made using socio-economic criteria and directed the preparation of revised merit lists. The HC, in its April 7 order, found that the affected selected candidates had not been impleaded in the original writ petitions, despite their appointments being at stake. The bench ruled that such non-impleadment was a critical procedural lapse and sufficient to vitiate the earlier judgment. Additionally, the court took note of its own prior ruling that the 2024 judgment striking down the socio-economic criteria would apply prospectively. Since the disputed recruitments were conducted under earlier policies, the court held that they could not be invalidated retrospectively. The combined effect of these rulings is expected to impact over 25,000 candidates whose appointments had been under uncertainty due to ongoing litigation. The decisions also removed a major hurdle in the recruitment process, which had been stalled for months. MSID:: 130169004 413 |
