The Supreme Court of India held that when an official job advertisement contains vague, ambiguous, or loosely drafted educational qualification criteria, the benefit of such ambiguity must be extended to participating candidates rather than resulting in their disqualification.

Interpreting Ambiguous Recruitment Criteria

A Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar heard an appeal arising from a dispute concerning selection and appointment to the post of Librarian under the Law Department.

Key Observations and Legal Principles

  • Protection Against Faulty Draftsmanship: The Court observed that candidates cannot be penalized or rendered ineligible due to ambiguities or drafting errors originating from the recruiting authority or department.
  • Setting Aside High Court Interference: The Bench set aside the judgment of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, which had expanded the scope of dispute and interfered with the Central Administrative Tribunal's (CAT) decision favoring the candidate.
  • Fairness in Public Employment: Emphasizing administrative fairness, the Court ruled that eligibility requirements must be read reasonably, and where dual interpretations exist, the interpretation favoring the applicant's eligibility should prevail.

The Supreme Court accordingly allowed the appeal and restored the candidate's selection.