Constable recruitment: Punjab and Haryana HC slams HSSC for rejecting Backward Class candidates over date on caste certificates

The court ruled, “To avoid the filing of further petitions, it is hereby made clear that benefit of this judgment would be available to all the candidates who have been transposed from BC to general category.” The ruling is likely to benefit over 70,000 candidates.

The case was filed by multiple petitioners whose candidature for the reserved BC category was rejected because they submitted caste certificates issued before April 1, 2023. The petitioners, represented by Senior Advocate D S Patwalia and Advocate A S Chadha, argued that the recruitment advertisement had not prescribed any specific cut-off date for certificate submission. They contended that their caste status was permanent and did not change annually, unlike financial status, which determines eligibility under the creamy layer criteria.

The petitioners had applied for 5,000 posts of male constable and 1,000 posts of female constable (General Duty) advertised by HSSC through advertisement No. 1/2024 dated February 12, 2024. The recruitment was later re-advertised through a public notice issued on June 28, 2024. The candidates had already cleared the Common Eligibility Test (CET) for Group-C posts, which was a prerequisite for applying.

The petitioners highlighted that they had initially submitted valid caste certificates linked to the PPP system while filing their applications. However, after the selection process began, HSSC arbitrarily introduced a requirement that only certificates issued after April 1, 2023, would be considered valid. Many candidates, unaware of this change, were subsequently disqualified. The petitioners argued that since the PPP system already maintained verified caste and income details, HSSC was obligated to rely on this official database instead of imposing new requirements.

On behalf of the state, Senior Deputy Advocate General Shruti Jain Goyal defended the HSSC’s decision by citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Divya v Union of India (2024), which held that caste certificates are subject to changes in financial status and should be periodically updated. The government contended that failing to provide fresh certificates meant the applicants could not be considered under the BC category.

Justice Bansal, however, rejected this argument, stating that HSSC’s own advertisement allowed candidates to rely on PPP data in case fresh certificates were unavailable. He noted that the commission had access to the PPP database, which contained real-time verified data, and that disqualifying candidates over a retrospective certificate requirement was unjustified. The court ruled that HSSC could not change the rules midway through the selection process.