Court Orders Appointment of Candidate after Commission's Arbitrary Rejection of Candidature for Lack of Document Verification
In a landmark judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has come down heavily on the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) for overstepping its constitutional mandate by engaging in document verification during the recruitment process. The court, presided over by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, ruled in favor of petitioner Prasoon Sharma, whose candidature for the post of Manager (Utility) with the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC) was unjustly rejected by the HPSC.
The court found that the HPSC had exceeded its authority by demanding additional documents to verify Sharma's work experience, a task that lies within the jurisdiction of the appointing authority, not the Commission. The Commission had rejected Sharma's application on the grounds that he failed to provide documents like bank statements and EPF records to substantiate his employment with a private firm, M/s Atcon Engineers. However, the court noted that such requirements were not specified in the original job advertisement and were introduced post facto, in violation of established legal norms.
Justice Brar emphasized that the role of the Commission is limited to conducting examinations, declaring results, and making recommendations, rather than acting as an adjudicatory body. The final authority for appointment, including the verification of documents and antecedents, rests with the employer. The court highlighted that the Commission's actions were arbitrary, lacking any statutory backing, and undermined the autonomy of the appointing authority.
The judgment ordered the HSIIDC to consider Sharma for appointment, given that he met all eligibility criteria and secured higher marks than the last selected candidate. The court directed that Sharma be given a deemed date of appointment with all consequential benefits, except for actual pay, which would commence from the date he joins service.
The court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to the constitutional framework and preserving institutional integrity. It serves as a reminder to public bodies to operate within their defined roles and refrain from actions that might infringe on the jurisdiction of other entities.
The case has been widely discussed for its implications on the recruitment processes of public service commissions, reinforcing the separation of powers and duties among different governmental bodies. The judgment is expected to influence future recruitment policies, ensuring fairness and transparency in public sector appointments.
Bottom Line:
Public Service Commission cannot engage in character verification, antecedent inquiry, confirmation of credentials, or adjudication of document validity unless expressly authorized by a statutory framework. The role of the Commission is limited to conducting examinations, declaring results, and making recommendations.
Statutory provision(s): Article 320 of the Constitution of India, Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Employees Service Bye Laws, Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 2013.
Prasoon Sharma v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2841873
