Supreme Court Rules Eligibility Must Exist on Application Date in Rajasthan APO Exam Case

In RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION v. LAVANSHU SANKHLA & ORS., the Supreme Court has clarified an important rule regarding eligibility in recruitment examinations. The Court held that candidates must possess the required qualification on the date of application, not at a later stage.

The judgement was delivered by a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta on May 4, 2026. The case arose from the Rajasthan Assistant Prosecution Officer (APO) Examination, 2024, where certain candidates were permitted by the High Court to appear despite lacking a law degree at the time of applying.

The recruitment advertisement, issued on March 7, 2024, clearly required candidates to hold a law degree to be eligible. However, the respondents completed their degrees only on August 22, 2024, which was after the application submission date. Despite this, the High Court had allowed them to participate in the preliminary examination.

Challenging this decision, the Rajasthan Public Service Commission approached the Supreme Court. The Commission argued that eligibility conditions must be strictly followed as per the advertisement and governing rules, and no relaxation was permitted.

The Supreme Court agreed with the Commission and set aside the High Court’s decision. It emphasised that eligibility must be determined based on the details and documents submitted at the time of application. The Court stated that there is no provision allowing candidates to supplement their qualifications after applying.

“A conjoint reading of the advertisement and the governing rules makes it evident that the relevant date for determining eligibility… is the date of submission of the application,” the Court observed.

The Bench also referred to the Rajasthan Prosecution Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, noting that these rules do not allow candidates who are still pursuing their qualifications or who obtain them later to participate in the selection process.

The respondents argued that allowing more candidates would increase competition and improve the selection process. However, the Court rejected this argument, stating that such considerations cannot override clear eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement.

The Court further explained that accepting such claims would create uncertainty in recruitment processes. It would also place an unnecessary administrative burden on authorities, who would then need to track whether candidates acquire qualifications after applying.

“…acceptance of the respondents’ contention… would introduce uncertainty into the selection process and impose an unwarranted administrative burden,” the Court added.

With these observations, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. The ruling reinforces the principle that recruitment conditions must be strictly followed, ensuring fairness and clarity in public employment processes.