In a significant relief to direct recruit Assistant Audit Officers of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, the Delhi High Court has protected the petitioners from termination, stayed the effect of the Central Administrative Tribunal’s order against them and recognised their prima facie entitlement to six attempts to clear the Subordinate Accounts Service Examination during probation.

A Division Bench comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Vinod Kumar directed the continuation of status quo in respect of the petitioners whose services had not been terminated, thereby protecting them from further adverse action.

The petitioners were represented by advocate Samarth Luthra, who submitted that the CAG’s own circulars contemplated six normal chances for clearing the SAS Examination and that direct recruit AAOs could not be deprived of those opportunities because the requisite number of examinations had not been conducted during their probation period.

The High Court found that Mr Luthra’s submissions on behalf of his clients deserved acceptance prima facie. It held that the CAG circulars envisaged a minimum of six chances to participate in the SAS Examination and that, in the absence of any separate dispensation governing direct recruits, there was no reason to restrict those circulars only to promotees.

The Court consequently found prima facie substance in Mr Luthra’s case that his clients, whose probation had been extended to four years, were entitled to at least six attempts at the SAS Examination during that period.

The Bench further held that the Recruitment Rules did not prescribe any maximum number of attempts for clearing the SAS Examination. The provision in the CAG circulars permitting six ordinary attempts could, therefore, not be regarded as travelling beyond the Recruitment Rules.

The Court also noted that the petitioners’ probation had been extended to four years and that, at the rate of two SAS Examinations each year, at least eight examinations ought to have been conducted during that period. Only five examinations were conducted.

The High Court held that no fault could be attributed to the petitioners for the failure to conduct the required number of examinations and found that they had established a prima facie case warranting interference.

The petitioners were appointed as probationary AAOs in September 2021 and were required to clear the SAS Examination for confirmation. Their initial probation of two years was subsequently extended by another two years.

The writ petition challenges the CAT judgment dated 7 July 2026 dismissing their claim. The High Court issued notice to the CAG and the Union of India and listed the matter for further hearing on 6 October 2026.

Advocate Samarth Luthra appeared for the petitioners. Dr S.S. Hooda, Standing Counsel represented the CAG, while Central Government Standing Counsel Puja S. Kalra appeared for the Union of India.