
RACHNA & ORS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA
W.P. (Civil) No. 1410 of 2020,
Decided on Feburary 24, 2021
Judges: A.M.KHANWILKAR, INDU
MALHOTRA & AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.
Facts:
Due to the COVID-19
pandemic, the UPSC exams were postponed to October 4th, 2020. Many aspirants
objected, and thus, UPSC allowed revising their choice of examination center or
withdraw their application. Meanwhile, several pleas were filed seeking
postponement of the examination and for relaxation in the upper age limit and
an additional attempt. The Court did not issue any directions to UPSC but said
that the authorities could explore the possibility. On February 5th, a decision
was taken by the Centre wherein it agreed to give one time-restricted
relaxation, limited to CSE 2021 to only those candidates who appeared in
Examination 2020 as their last permissible attempt and otherwise are not
age-barred from appearing in CSE 2021.
Issue:
Whether the
Petitioners are entitled to an additional chance for CSE 2021 on account of the
unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic?
Held:
The Supreme Court held
that the provision of additional attempts is not permissible under the scheme of
rules framed for Civil Services Examination. The Court observed that the
petitioner’s claims are a lame excuse under the guise of the pandemic to gain
an additional attempt in the future CSE examinations.
The Supreme Court
refering to Rule 4 and Rule 6 of the Rules for Competitive Examination, 2020
prescribing the eligibility about the number of attempts and age. Rule 6
categorically states that the prescribed age-limits cannot be
relaxed in any situation. The Court held that all aspirants, irrespective of
the attempts, should be subjected to the same consequences arising due to the
pandemic. The Centre should not give concession not envisaged in the Rules.
Regarding the
petitioners’ claim that the Respondents have exercised discretion in earlier
selections, the Court observed that there is no substance in the claim. The
Court has held that while it is within the executive’s realm to take a policy
decision based on the prevailing circumstances but it is not within the domain
of the Courts to legislate.