Breaking
India

Delhi HC Slams SSC for Three-Year Exam Ban on Candidate Without Hearing

The Delhi High Court severely admonished the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) for cancelling a candidate's candidature and imposing a three-year examination ban based solely on an invigilator's report without issuing a show-cause notice or granting a hearing, observing that such arbitrary debarments are "almost akin to civil death".

Delhi HC Slams SSC for Three-Year Exam Ban on Candidate Without Hearing
Image courtesy: SSC

In Brief

  1. The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by the Staff Selection Commission challenging an order that set aside a candidate's three-year debarment.
  2. A bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla held that an invigilator's report cannot be treated as "gospel" without independent verification.
  3. The court highlighted that debarring candidates without issuing a show-cause notice violates principles of natural justice and inflicts severe damage on job seekers' careers.

The Delhi High Court strongly criticized the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) for arbitrarily cancelling a candidate's candidature and barring him from public examinations for three years without providing an opportunity for defense. Dismissing a petition filed by the recruitment body, a division bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla observed that debarring a candidate from competitive examinations without due process causes irreparable harm and is "almost akin to civil death".

The case originated from an adverse report submitted by a central supervisor and hall invigilator during an examination, which led the SSC to unilaterally cancel the candidate's paper and ban him from future tests for three years. However, the commission failed to issue a show-cause notice or seek the candidate's response before taking punitive action. The bench ruled that an invigilator's report cannot be accepted as absolute truth without verifying facts, noting that elementary principles of natural justice mandate that a person must be heard before facing severe career-altering penalties.

Expressing dismay at the recruitment body's decision to litigate the matter further, the high court noted that the entire dispute could have been avoided had the commission simply extended the basic courtesy of issuing a show-cause notice. The court upheld the order directing the SSC to accord a fair hearing, warning recruiting agencies against adopting high-handed procedures that jeopardize the livelihoods and career prospects of young job aspirants.

More from India