UPSC Extra Chance For Last Attempt Candidates : Supreme Court Reserves Judgment [LIVE UPDATES]

ASG: All these grounds are sham grounds.

Bench: Don’t say that it’s sham. You may call it tenuous.

ASG: I’d call it lame.

Bench: Tenuous.

ASG: I was probably carried away by Shyam Divan’s arguments.

ASG continues with his submissions and states that the syllabi of the Preliminary examination has not changed since 2015, and therefore the candidates are aware of what is asked. 

Bench: For lateral entry, age limit is 45 and no attempt bar. The government is agreeable to give concession to attempts barred, but not to age barred ones. But government is allowing entries without age bar. 

ASG: Earlier we weren’t even giving this one-time concession. What is required to be examined is whether the decision to not give the relaxation arbitrary, uninformed or capricious. 

Bench: But, they have relaxations too.

ASG: I have not applied my mind to that. 

ASG: That is a class by itself and cannot be examined in this context. 

ASG: Our submission is that the writ petitions are completely premature.

Bench (now referring to people joining at JS level): Your existing policy to draw from outside source and not appear through exam. We want to examine that part also, we want to consider the whole picture.

ASG: What should be the syllabi, age or number of attempts are all matters of governmental policy. Whether to grant relaxation for age or attempt is also a matter of policy. Interference can happen if the decision is non-informed, arbitrary or capricious.

Bench: You have enough time to argue now. We expected them to close at 3, but they did it before that. 

ASG: The only ground on which the court can interfere is if the policy framed is completely capricious and arbitrary.

ASG now cites a 2017 judgement of the Supreme Court.