CAG Must Follow 2021 PwBD Notification for SSC CGLE-2018 Auditor Appointment

Case Details: Sudhanshu Kardam vs. Comptroller and Auditor General of India - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 284 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

Vikram Nath & Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Rahul Bajaj, Ms Sarah, Kathiravan N, Advs. & Ayyam Perumal Karthik M., Aor for the Petitioner.
Ms Archana Pathak Dave, Anil Kaushik, A.S.Gs., Vaibhav Dwivedi, Abhishek Jain, Ishaan Sharma, Madhav Sinhal, Kamal Digpaul, Ms Harshita Choubey, Mahendra Kumawat, Pranjal Singh, Aashna Gill, Nachiketa Joshi, Diwakar Sharma, Aastha Singh, Yogesh Vats, Rajeshwari Shankar, Padmesh Mishra, Advs., Amrish Kumar, Dr N. Visakamurthy, Aors, S. N. Terdal, (Aor)

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) initiated recruitment for Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts, and two vacancies were earmarked for the post of the Auditor in the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) under the ‘Other PwD’ category.

The respondent no. 3, a PwD candidate with a disability certificate recording mental illness at 55%, applied under ‘PwD-Other’ and OBC categories, qualified for the examination, opted for the Auditor, and was recommended for the appointment.

The CAG returned certain dossiers, including that of the respondent no. 3, stating that the post of the Auditor had been identified as not suitable for PwBD with mental illness, and that rejection was formally communicated on 30 September 2021.

The appellant, a similarly placed PwD candidate from the Scheduled Caste category with Specific Learning Disability above 40% (Category ‘D’), had challenged the same communication before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in a separate original application and was later impleaded before the High Court in the writ arising from the respondent no.3’s case.

The respondent no. 3 filed Original Application No. 339 of 2022 before the CAT, relying on the Gazette Notification dated 4 January 2021 issued by the DEPwD, asserting that the ‘mental illness’ benchmark disability was included as suitable for the post of the Auditor. The CAT allowed the application on 23 January 2023, directing the CAG to constitute a Medical Board to assess the respondent no.3’s fitness and, if found fit, to offer an appointment to the post.

The CAG challenged the CAT order before the High Court. The Division Bench set aside the CAT’s order and restored the communication dated 30 September 2021 by which the respondent no.3’s dossier had been returned. The appellant’s impleadment application in the High Court was allowed during the writ proceedings. Thereafter, an appeal was made before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court observed that in view of the Gazette Notification dated 04.01.2021 issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment identifying suitable posts for persons with benchmark disabilities in Group ‘C’ posts, the appellant and the respondent no.3 (SSC CGLE-2018 candidates) were to be considered for appointment in the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

The Supreme Court held that the Staff Selection Commission was to be directed to forward their dossiers to the CAG and, if the posts advertised vide notification dated 05.05.2018 had already been filled, the respondents were to create supernumerary posts to accommodate both candidates.