Punjab & Haryana High Court Allows Challenge to Change in Haryana ADA Recruitment Syllabus

 

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed a petition challenging the modification of the Haryana Assistant District Attorney (ADA) recruitment syllabus, which had replaced law-oriented subjects with a general knowledge-based format. The court accepted the plea filed by a law graduate seeking the withdrawal of the recruitment advertisement and directed the authorities to revise the syllabus in accordance with legal and constitutional norms. The petitioner argued that the revised syllabus, which now included subjects like current events, Indian history, geography, culture, polity, economy, mental ability, reasoning, data interpretation, basic numeracy, and Haryana general knowledge, had completely eliminated the study of substantive law, which forms the foundation of the ADA position.

The petitioner further contended that the change was arbitrary, irrational, and made without proper consultation between the state government and the Haryana Public Service Commission, violating the recruitment rules and the constitutional requirements laid down under Article 320. It was argued that such an abrupt shift would unfairly disadvantage candidates who had devoted years to studying law, as the test no longer assessed legal knowledge or analytical ability in the context of legal practice. This alteration, according to the petitioner, defeated the purpose of the examination, which was to select competent legal professionals for the post of Assistant District Attorney.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil, after examining the plea, found substance in the petitioner’s arguments and granted interim relief. The High Court directed the concerned authorities to withdraw the impugned advertisement and to reconsider or reframe the syllabus for the ADA screening test to ensure that it aligns with the qualifications and duties expected from a candidate for the post. The court emphasized that recruitment processes must adhere to the principles of fairness and reasonableness, and that any change in the pattern or syllabus should have a rational nexus to the objectives of the post being filled.

The ruling highlights that public recruitment examinations must not be altered in a manner that undermines the credibility of the process or disregards the nature of the profession for which candidates are being tested. It reinforces the principle that aspirants should not be placed at an unfair disadvantage by arbitrary administrative decisions, particularly when the profession requires specialized domain knowledge such as law.

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community