With reference to the Jharkhand High Court's stay on the cancellation of 342 civil service appointments, which one of the following correctly matches the principle with its actual application in this case?
Ethics · 22 Aug 2026
Sachin Kumar v DSSSB blanket cancellation
About this question
Why in news
The Jharkhand High Court stayed the state government's cancellation of 342 civil service appointments and 56 Food Safety Officer posts, ruling that terminating regularly appointed officers without individually establishing their involvement in exam irregularities violates natural justice.
Why for UPSC
UPSC's Ethics paper regularly tests whether an aspirant can distinguish between similarly-sounding due-process principles and correctly identify which one actually governs a given administrative action - a distinction this case makes concrete through a real precedent citation.
Prelims summary
Blanket cancellation of examination results without individually establishing which candidates were involved in irregularities violates natural justice, per the Sachin Kumar v. DSSSB standard; ending a protest and establishing guilt are legally distinct requirements.
On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.