Aarav Jain vs. The Bihar Public Service Commission
Background
Eight candidates who had cleared the 30th Bihar Judicial Services Examination (for 349 posts of Civil Judge, Junior Division) and scored higher marks than the last selected candidates in their categories had their candidature cancelled by the Bihar Public Service Commission because they failed to produce certain original certificates (such as character certificates or NOCs) at the time of interview, even though they had submitted attested copies and later furnished the originals. The Patna High Court dismissed their writ petitions, and they appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the Commission's rejection of these candidates purely on the technical ground of delayed submission of original certificates was improper, unjustified and too harsh, especially since none of the underlying certificates were alleged to be false and the originals were in fact submitted before the Commission's final decision. The Court noted vacancies still existed in the general category and directed that the five general-category appellants be adjusted against those vacancies, while the State was left to accommodate the remaining three (EBC, SC, BC category) appellants against future vacancies or by borrowing posts from later recruitment. The appellants were to be given notional seniority and benefits but no back-pay/arrears. A related application by an intervenor (Jyoti Joshi) based on a conflicting Patna High Court judgment was rejected because that judgment had ignored the Supreme Court's own earlier interim orders.
Lesson Learnt
In recruitment matters, disqualifying an otherwise meritorious and eligible candidate for a purely technical/procedural lapse (like delay in submitting original documents that are not themselves found false) can be struck down by courts as disproportionate, especially when vacancies exist to accommodate the candidate.