Supreme Court dismisses Haryana Government's plea against quashing Extra Marks Policy

The Supreme Court upheld a Punjab and Haryana High Court decision that struck down Haryana government's policy giving additional marks to its residents in job exams. The court dismissed the government's appeal, calling the policy a "populist measure." The High Court had deemed the policy unconstitutional, ruling it unfairly favored certain candidates.

The Haryana government's policy aimed to grant extra marks based on socioeconomic criteria, claiming it aimed to provide opportunities to those historically disadvantaged in public employment. However, the Supreme Court expressed skepticism, questioning the fairness of giving bonus marks to candidates who scored equally on merit. The court emphasized that such measures could lead to unfair advantages.

ALSO READ: NHRC issues notice to Haryana Government and DGP over surgery on patient's wrong knee

Background of the case

The case arose from a challenge by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission against the High Court's ruling from May 31. The High Court had invalidated the state's policy, which awarded 5% bonus marks to job applicants based on their socioeconomic status and residency in Haryana. It criticized the government for creating arbitrary distinctions among applicants and conducting recruitment in a careless manner.

Following the High Court's decision, the state was directed to conduct fresh evaluations solely based on the candidates' scores in a common eligibility test (CET). The policy had affected recruitment across various job categories, prompting legal scrutiny over its constitutionality and fairness in employment practices.

ALSO READ: Haryana Chief Secretary directs DCs to identify Policy gaps for improvement

The Supreme Court's decision reaffirmed the principle that recruitment processes should prioritize merit-based assessments and avoid measures that could lead to discrimination or unfair advantages based on residency or socioeconomic status. This ruling sets a precedent for similar cases across the country, emphasizing the need for transparent and equitable hiring practices in government jobs.