Candidate cannot be permitted grievance redressal at any stage of recruitment process, says Supreme Court

New Delhi: A candidate cannot be permitted to approach for the redressal of his grievance at any stage of time during a recruitment process, the Supreme Court has said.

A bench of justices S K Kaul and M M Sundresh said there has to be a closure to the process of recruitment and that it cannot go on indefinitely.

“In our view, in a recruitment process, a candidate cannot be permitted to approach for redressal, howsoever may be the genuineness of the grievance, at any stage of time as there has to be a closure to the process of recruitment,” the bench said.

The top court’s observation came while hearing an appeal filed by a man who had applied for the post of sub-assistant engineer (civil) in 1999.

The appellant cleared the medical fitness test but his appointment could not take place as the police verification report was not received.

The petitioner claimed that he waited for about seven years for getting the appointment letter and only thereafter, approached the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).

His application was directed to be considered and in 2006, it is stated that the Public Works Department (PWD) put only one aspect against the appellant — non-receipt of the police verification report.

In the second application filed by the appellant, he sought a direction for foregoing the police verification report as he had suffered for about eight years.

The tribunal, however, rejected the claim on the ground that the appellant had not made the representation to know the fate of the police verification report.

The appellant assailed the decision of the tribunal before the Calcutta High Court, which dismissed the case on the ground that the appellant is a Bangladeshi citizen.

The top court said the fact that the advertisement was of 1999 and it is 2022 now itself is an impediment to any relief to the appellant.

“In case of an advertisement dated 1999, the appellant cannot be permitted to plead that he was waiting for seven long years for getting an appointment letter and then woke up to file the OA before the State Administrative Tribunal.

“This itself is a ground to non-suit the appellant. In view of the aforesaid, we are not commenting on the factual correctness of the police verification report, which is sought to be disputed by the appellant. The appeal is accordingly dismissed,” the bench said.