Vague Eligibility Criterion Benefits the Candidate: SC

Vague Eligibility Criterion Benefits the Candidate: Supreme Court Restores Librarian's Selection, Faults High Court for Doing Employer's Job

Published: 10 October 2026 · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court held that ambiguity or vagueness in an eligibility criterion in a recruitment advertisement must be construed in favour of a candidate who prima facie holds the qualifications, and that the High Court wrongly decided for itself whether experience gained while studying counted. The Tribunal's direction to offer the appellant the post of Librarian was restored, but without back seniority and pay fixation (paras 3, 8-9).

Key holdings

A court should not undertake an eligibility exercise that the employer itself never raised (para 8).

An unqualified requirement of '3 years' experience' in an advertisement is vague (para 8).

Ambiguity in the prescribed qualification is construed in favour of the candidate (para 8).

The appellant gets the post but not seniority and pay fixation from the date the last candidate was appointed (para 9).

Brief Facts

A 2014 advertisement by the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board required Graduation with M.Lib and '3 years' experience' for the post of Librarian; when the selected candidate did not join, the appellant, first on the waiting list, was recommended (para 4). In December 2020 the government refused to appoint him, because one year of his experience as an Assistant Librarian overlapped with his M.LIS course (paras 5-6). The Central Administrative Tribunal ordered his appointment with seniority and pay fixation, but on 10.07.2025 a Division Bench of the High Court held that experience counts only after acquiring the qualification, and dismissed his review (paras 2, 6-7).

Court's Findings

The Division Bench undertook an exercise that should normally be conducted by the employer; the respondents had at no point raised the issue that his work as Assistant Librarian was not the experience the advertisement required (para 8). The prescribed qualification was itself vague: the advertisement did not say whether the 3 years' experience had to be as Librarian, Library Assistant or a similar post, and the respondents made no effort to clarify it (para 8). Any ambiguity or vagueness in the prescribed qualification should be construed in favour of a candidate who prima facie appears to possess the requisite qualifications; the High Court erred in expanding the dispute and holding the appellant ineligible (para 8).

Legal Principle

Clarifying an ambiguous eligibility criterion in a recruitment advertisement is primarily the employer's task, not the court's. Where the employer leaves it vague, the ambiguity is construed in favour of the candidate who prima facie possesses the prescribed qualifications (paras 3, 8).

Precedents Relied Upon

Anil Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors. (2000) 1 SCC 128
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 2, 7
Relied on by the appellant in his review petition before the High Court, and referred to by the Division Bench in holding that experience counts only after the qualification is obtained.
Sheshrao Jangluji Bagde v. Bhaiyya 1991 Supp (1) SCC 367
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 7
Referred to by the High Court Division Bench in holding that experience can be gained only after obtaining the requisite educational qualification.
Shailendra Dania v. S.P. Dubey (2007) 5 SCC 535
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 7
Referred to by the High Court Division Bench in holding that experience can be gained only after obtaining the requisite educational qualification.

View all precedents (4)

K.K. Dixit v. Rajasthan Housing Board (2015) 1 SCC 474
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 7
Referred to by the High Court Division Bench in holding that experience can be gained only after obtaining the requisite educational qualification.

Vague Eligibility Criterion Benefits the Candidate: Supreme Court Restores Librarian's Selection, Faults High Court for Doing Employer's Job

Judgment Intelligence

Key holdings

Brief Facts

Court's Findings

Legal Principle

Precedents Relied Upon

Related Judgments

Identity of Offender Not Proved Beyond Doubt: Supreme Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction, Acquits Appellant

Personal Law on Date of Death Governs Succession to Widow-Bhumidhar's Holding: Supreme Court Rejects Reversioners' Claim

Direct Recruits Rank Above Compassionate and Temporary Appointees in Seniority: Supreme Court Settles Tamil Nadu Dispute