Supreme Court Rejects Haryana SSC Appeal, Invalidates Socio-Economic Marks Policy


A notification was issued by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (SSC) in 2022 which was set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High court on 31 May 2024. This notification granted 5% additional marks to Haryana domiciles in the recruitment for certain Group C and D posts, based on specific “socio-economic” criteria. The high court set aside this notification stating that it created an artificial classification that unfairly benefited Haryana domiciles, violating Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India. The High Court held that such socio-economic criteria were arbitrary and discriminatory, and that the rules should be based on actual data rather than political agendas. It further emphasized that reservations should adhere to constitutional provisions and apply across the entire country, not be limited to state residents alone. The Haryana SSC and other petitioners, aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, approached the Supreme Court for relief. The Supreme Court vacation bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and SVN Bhatti had adjourned the hearing of the Haryana Staff Selection Commission’s (HSSC) appeal against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s ruling on the 5% additional marks for Haryana domiciles until June 24, 2024, despite the petitioners’ plea for urgency in order to further examine the validity and implications of the High Court’s judgment and the Haryana SSC’s notification.


The criteria included factors such as:

  1. No family member being a regular government employee and family income being less than 1.80 lakh rupees annually.
  2. The applicant being a widow or the first/second child whose father died before a certain age.
  3. Belonging to a “denotified tribe” or Nomadic tribe of Haryana that is neither a Scheduled Caste nor a backward class.
  4. Additional weightage for experience in relevant posts within Haryana government bodies.


The Supreme Court today i.e. on Monday 24 June dismissed the petition filed by the Haryana SSC challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s judgment highlighting the importance of adherence to constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination. Justice AS Oka, part of the bench hearing the case, referred to the policy of granting additional marks as a “populist measure” during the proceedings. The court found no errors in the High Court’s judgment and dismissed the Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) filed by the SSC. The decision effectively nullified the 2022 Notification, which had introduced additional marks for certain categories of candidates based on socio-economic factors like family income and familial circumstances.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *