Why in news:

• The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the socioeconomic criteria set by the Haryana government for awarding additional marks in state government job recruitment is unconstitutional. While announcing the decision, the court has emphasized that such criteria violate constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.

Key Points:

• In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has declared the socioeconomic criteria set by the Haryana government for awarding additional marks in state government job recruitment as unconstitutional.
• The court's decision was delivered by a division bench, which found the criteria in violation of Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution. Notably, these articles ensure equality before the law and prohibit discrimination based on various grounds.
• It is noteworthy here that the socioeconomic criteria, introduced by the Haryana government a few years ago, aimed to grant additional marks to certain classes of candidates in the recruitment process for Group C and D jobs.
• However, the court ruled that this approach was unconstitutional. The criteria were found to be discriminatory and arbitrary, thus failing to meet the constitutional mandate of equality and non-discrimination.
• A series of petitions challenged the socioeconomic criteria, arguing that it effectively functioned as a form of reservation based on factors such as descent and domicile.
• The court agreed with these arguments, noting that such criteria are prohibited under the Constitution. The petitioners highlighted that 20 out of 100 marks were allocated for socioeconomic factors and experience, which disproportionately favored certain candidates over others based on their family background and state residency status.
• The court found that the criteria were not only discriminatory but also unnecessary given the existing reservations for economically weaker sections and socially backward classes like Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes.
• Besides, the decision of the Court has emphasized that recruitment to public service positions should be based purely on merit, without additional marks for socioeconomic factors that are not directly related to an individual's qualifications or abilities.