The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the Haryana Public Service Commission’s advertisement for the Assistant District Attorney (ADA) recruitment insofar as it prescribed a screening test syllabus entirely based on general knowledge topics and excluded legal subjects. The Court observed that thousands of law graduates undertake LL.B. courses with the expectation that their legal education may open doors to public employment, particularly for posts like ADA where legal acumen is integral. By eliminating law from the screening stage, the new syllabus rendered the qualification irrelevant at the threshold.
In its ruling, Justice Sandeep Moudgil held that the screening stage must have a rational nexus to the requirements of the post. The exclusion of legal subjects from the preliminary test, in favor of general knowledge, defeated the very purpose of recruiting candidates with legal expertise. When candidates possessing a law degree are filtered out at the first stage by testing unrelated areas, their efforts and education are nullified. The Court further held that the uneven syllabus created a discriminatory barrier, depriving many deserving candidates the chance to compete meaningfully.
The Court also noted that while selection bodies typically have discretion in framing rules and criteria, such discretion must not be arbitrary or disconnected from the objective of recruitment. Here, by removing legal topics entirely from the screening test, the process lacked a “rational nexus” to the nature of the ADA position, which demands competence in law, procedure, evidence, and prosecution. The advertisement’s pattern, in fact, inverted the logic of recruitment: legal subject knowledge would only come into play after eliminating the vast majority of candidates.
Moreover, the Court pointed out that historically, previous recruitment iterations had designated a substantial weight to law subjects in the screening test. The sudden and radical departure from that model was unjustified and procedurally flawed. The High Court held that such major changes should not be made unilaterally without consultation or transparency. The sudden shift to a general knowledge test without prior engagement or justification eroded fairness and equal opportunity.
As a result of its decision, the Court struck down the screening test syllabus and directed that the advertisement be modified to reintroduce legal subjects in the screening stage. This will enable candidates to be assessed on their legal skills early in the process rather than being eliminated before their core competency is tested. The ruling was seen as a vindication for aspirants who challenge the new syllabus as unreasonable and hostile to those trained in law.
Through this judgment, the High Court reaffirmed that the design of recruitment examinations must reflect the essential qualifications and functional demands of the post. For positions requiring legal expertise, recruitment processes cannot bypass the evaluation of legal knowledge. The decision restores the logical alignment between the ADA qualification, examination process, and the duties expected from successful candidates.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.