Calcutta: The Calcutta High Court has clarified that cut-off marks can’t be introduced midway in recruitment processes, especially after the selection procedure has already begun. In a significant judgment, the court also held that similarly placed candidates must be given equal relief if the change is struck down for one person.
This decision strengthens fairness in public recruitment and highlights that authorities cannot change eligibility criteria once a process has started.
Background of the Recruitment Cut-Off Marks Ruling
The case involved the recruitment for the post of Krishi Prayukti Sahayak (Agricultural Assistant) conducted by the West Bengal Public Service Commission (WBPSC).
The selection process included:
- A written exam marked out of 150
- An interview marked out of 15
The advertisement specified minimum qualifying marks only for the written part and did not prescribe any interview cut-off. Yet, during the process, the Commission suddenly introduced interview cut-off marks.
What Went Wrong in the Recruitment
Despite securing a total score higher than the last selected candidate in his category, the petitioner was not recommended for appointment. This was solely because he failed to meet the retroactively applied interview cut-off marks.
Specifically:
- Petitioner scored 81.75 aggregate marks
- Last selected Scheduled Caste candidate scored 81.50 marks
However, the petitioner was denied recommendation because the WBPSC had later introduced a qualifying score for the interview, which was not part of the original advertisement.
Earlier Litigation and Precedent
This issue had already been addressed in an earlier case involving another candidate, Pritam Ghosal.
The West Bengal Administrative Tribunal and later the High Court had held that:
- Fixing interview qualifying marks after the process was underway was arbitrary and illegal
As a result, the tribunal directed that the candidate’s name be recommended. The High Court upheld that decision.
Recruitment Cut-Off Marks Ruling: Court’s Key Observations
In its judgment, the Division Bench of Justice Madhuresh Prasad and Justice Prasenjit Biswas emphasized:
1. Illegality of Midway Rule Changes
Recruitment rules should be clear, consistent, and not changed mid-process. Introducing a qualifying mark for interviews during an ongoing recruitment is improper and against recruitment fairness.
2. Article 14 and Non-Discrimination
The court noted that if one candidate receives relief due to a rule being declared illegal, other candidates in the same position must also be granted the same benefit. Refusing parity would amount to discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution.
3. Reliance on Supreme Court Precedent
The judgment referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Arvind Kumar Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which states that once relief is granted to one group of employees, similar relief must ordinarily be extended to identically situated persons unless there are exceptional reasons (like delay or consent).
Recruitment Cut-Off Marks Ruling: Court Directions
After allowing the writ petition:
- The court directed the WBPSC to recommend the petitioner’s name within eight weeks.
- The relevant State authorities must issue the appointment within another eight weeks.
This means the petitioner will move ahead in the appointment process despite the Commission’s earlier action. The case reference is Nirmal Chandra Biswas v. State of West Bengal & Ors. (WPST 137 of 2025).
