Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of EWS Candidates; Holds Certificate Must Relate to Correct Financial Year and Exist Before Cut-Off Date

Case Name: Poonam Dwivedi & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 351
Date of Judgment/Order: 10 April 2026
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale

Held: The Supreme Court held that for availing reservation under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category, the income and asset certificate must relate to the correct financial year prior to the year of application and must be in the prescribed format and in possession of the candidate before the cut-off date, failing which the candidature is liable to be rejected.

Summary: The dispute arose from recruitment to the post of Health Worker (Female) in Uttar Pradesh, where candidates applying under the EWS category were denied selection on the ground that their certificates did not conform to the prescribed requirements. The appellants contended that discrepancies in their EWS certificates were attributable to errors by the issuing authorities and confusion in terminology used in government notifications and the advertisement. The Single Judge of the High Court granted relief by directing issuance of fresh certificates, but the Division Bench reversed the decision, holding the certificates invalid. The Supreme Court examined the advertisement conditions, the prescribed format, and the statutory framework under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Economically Weaker Sections) Act, 2020 and the relevant Office Memorandum. It clarified that the certificate must reflect income for the financial year immediately preceding the year of application, which in the present case was 2020–2021, and must be issued within the permissible timeline. The Court found that most certificates were issued prior to closure of the relevant financial year or related to incorrect financial years, thereby rendering them invalid. It rejected the argument that fault lay with the State authorities, holding that candidates had sufficient opportunity to obtain valid certificates after issuance of the advertisement. The Court also reiterated that eligibility conditions in public recruitment must be strictly complied with and cannot be relaxed on equitable considerations.

Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upheld the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court rejecting the candidature of the appellants under the EWS category, and held that no relief could be granted in absence of valid certificates as per the prescribed requirements, with no order as to costs and pending applications disposed of.