The State of Assam v. Arabinda Rabha
Background
The Assam Forest Department advertised 104 Constable posts in the Assam Forest Protection Force in 2014, and a selection process (physical test plus interview, no written exam) was completed in 2016, producing a select list that included the respondents. Days after a change of government following the 2016 Assam Assembly elections, the newly-incumbent Principal Chief Conservator of Forest flagged serious anomalies, including that the reservation policy had not been properly followed and that a disproportionate number of selected candidates came from just two districts, and the Government cancelled the entire select list without holding a formal inquiry. The Gauhati High Court, both at single-judge and Division Bench level, quashed the cancellation, holding that the flawed candidates could have been separated from the rest without scrapping the whole process, and that the PCCF's note could not substitute for a proper factual inquiry.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court, holding that where a selection process is tainted by systemic fraud or irregularity (here, breach of the reservation policy and disregard of binding precedent on accommodating meritorious reserved-category candidates in the open category) cancelling the entire list is not automatically disproportionate or arbitrary, and each case must be judged on its own facts rather than by a blanket rule that "the chaff can always be separated from the grain." The Court found the anomalies noted by the PCCF were genuine and serious enough to justify scrapping the list, and that the decision was neither irrational nor unreasonable. It also clarified that being on a select list does not create an indefeasible right to appointment, though the employer must have justifiable, non-arbitrary reasons to decline to appoint: here, since the list was never approved by the Government, no such vested right had accrued. The Court allowed the appeal, restored the cancellation, but exercised its Article 142 power to direct that the respondents be allowed to apply afresh with relaxed age and physical-standard requirements, given that nearly a decade had passed.
Lesson Learnt
Being included in a select list or panel for a government job does not by itself create an enforceable right to appointment; if the recruiting authority finds genuine, serious irregularities (such as violation of reservation rules) it can cancel the entire process rather than salvage parts of it, provided the decision is not arbitrary or disproportionate on the specific facts.