The Supreme Court has held that where service rules expressly make the Public Service Commission's decision on a candidate's eligibility final, the government cannot independently reopen and exhaustively reassess the candidate's eligibility after the Commission has found the person eligible and recommended them for appointment.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh heard a case involving one Shailendra Kumar Patel, who was selected and recommended by the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (CGPSC) for the post of Registrar in a State University. Despite the recommendation, the State Government constituted its own inquiry committee, which concluded that the Appellant did not possess the requisite experience, leading to his disqualification.

The Court set aside the concurrent findings of the Division and Single Bench decision of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which had justified the State Government decision to undertake an exhaustive enquiry into the eligibility of the Appellants, who were recommended and selected by the State PSC for the Registrar post.

“…we hold that it was not open for the Government to independently re-examine the issue of eligibility and arrive at a different conclusion, based on the detailed re-examination that the candidate is not eligible, that area of consideration having been taken away statutorily from the Appointing Authority and specifically assigned to the Commission.”, the Court observed.

The Court held under Rule 10 of the Chhattisgarh State Universities Service Rules, 1983, the Commission's decision on eligibility is final.

“Rule 10 of the Chhattisgarh State Universities Service Rules, 1983 accords finality to the Commission's decision on a candidate's eligibility…Rule 10, however, does not exclude or curtail the authority of the Appointing Authority to undertake verification as regards eligibility, but any such decision by the Appointing Authority on eligibility must be based on a patent and demonstrable deficiency in eligibility.”, the court said.

State's enquiry to candidate's eligibility is limited to verification of documents

The Court clarified that “while the Respondent-State was competent to verify the Appellant's eligibility, it would be limited only to the verification of his documents for its satisfaction, prior to issuance of the final appointment order, and could not mean authorising it to undertake an exhaustive enquiry into the eligibility, which exercise is within the domain of the Commission.”

“We are, therefore, of the considered view that the finality attached to the Commission's determination under Rule 10 prevents the Appointing Authority from examining the substantive question of eligibility in the manner so done in the present case. The verification could be only of the genuineness of the documents or to find out any patent demonstrative deficiency in the eligibility of the Appellant, which is not the case herein. Accordingly, the report dated 28.06.2023 cannot form the basis for redetermining the Appellant's eligibility, as it has no force of law and is liable to be ignored.”, the Court said.

As a result, the appeal was allowed, declaring the Appellant to be eligible for the post of Registrar and directing the State Government to issue a final appointment order within three weeks.

The Court also ordered that the Appellant be entitled to appointment from the date when other selected candidates were appointed, though without arrears of pay for the provisional period.

Cause Title: SHAILENDRA KUMAR PATEL VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS. (with connected case)

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 838

Click here to download judgment

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Nikhil Goel, Sr. Adv. Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Adv. Mr. Gladson Rodrigues, Adv. Ms. Keesha Kumar, Adv. Ms. Riddhi Jain, Adv. Mr. Adithya K Roy, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Ms. Ayushi Pandey, Adv. Ms. Aswathi M.K., AOR Mr. Shesh Deshpandey, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Dubey, A.A.G. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravinder Kumar Yadav, AOR Mr. Yashvardhan Shah, Adv. Mr. Akshit Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Kritika Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vivek Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ayushi Pandey, Adv. Ms. Aswathi M.K., AOR Mr. Shesh Deshpandey, Adv.