Govt free to change policy to suit socio-economic situation: Supreme Court

As the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government's policy to demonetise is due to come under the scrutiny of the Supreme Court, a recent judgment of the apex court itself said the government is free to change policy, taking into consideration the prevalent socio-economic conditions and that the courts have only a limited role to play.

In a judgment giving complete primacy to the Executive's authority to change the “rules of the game” to suit the needs of the deprived sections of the society, the Supreme Court in a recent judgment said the courts cannot stand in the way of the State reaching out to the “SC/ST, the backward classes, the physically handicapped and de-notified communities” just because such an apparently welfare policy hurts a select few.

The verdict by a Bench of Justices Shiva Kirti Singh and R. Banumathi upheld a government notification of the Tamil Nadu government in February 2014 granting five per cent relaxation of marks, from 60 to 55 per cent, to SC/ST, backward classes, physically-disabled and de-notified communities, etc, in the State Teachers Eligibility Test (TET), meant to hire the State's pool of teachers.

“The State government merely widened the ambit of TET so as to reach out to those candidates belonging to the deprived section of the society who were not able to compete, in spite of possessing good academic records and qualifications. The change brought about in the selection criteria is government’s prerogative,” the apex court observed.

“In terms of their extant reservation policy, the State government is free to take actions suitable to the socio-economic conditions prevalent in the State, especially with regard to selection of candidates belonging to reserved category to be employed in State Service,” Justice Banumathi observed.

Dismissing a batch of petitions filed by several general candidates against the relaxation, the Supreme Court observed that “merely because the government has widened the ambit of selection, so as to enable more and more candidates to take part in the selection process, the right of candidates who were already in the process cannot be said to have been adversely affected.”

“It is in the interest of reserved category of candidates that more candidates take part in the selection process and best and most efficient of them get selected. This will not amount to change in the criteria for selection after the selection process commenced,” the Supreme Court observed.