The Supreme Court has reiterated that Reserved Category candidates can stake claim in Unreserved Category if their merit and position in the merit list entitles them to do so.
The Division Bench of Justice M R Shah and Justice B V Nagarathna thus dismissed the appeal by BSNL challenging CAT's order directing it to consider respondent's candidature if sufficient vacancies exist for placement of the candidates belonging to OBC and against the present or future vacancies on the OBC category after determining the vacancies as per rules.
The Counsel for BSNL relied heavily on Union of India Vs. Ramesh Ram & Ors., 2010 Latest Caselaw 372 SC, to observe that in a case, where reserved category candidates are selected on merit and placed in the list of general category candidates, they can be adjusted against reserved category vacancies in order to get a service of higher choice at the time of service allocation.
The Court was posed with question as to whether in a case where the reserved category candidates secured more marks than the general category candidates, such reserved category candidates will have to be first adjusted in the general category pool and they shall be considered for appointment in the general category pool or against the vacancies meant for reserved category candidates?
The Court looked into the legal precedent established in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission & Ors, 2007 Latest Caselaw 543 SC, Public Service Commission,Uttaranchal Vs. Mamta Bisht and Ors, 2010 Latest Caselaw 420 SC,
It mentioned Saurav Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 Latest Caselaw 674 SC wherein it was held that it is well settled that candidates belonging to any of the vertical reservation categories are entitled to be selected in “open or general” category and it is also further observed that if such candidates belonging to reserved categories are entitled to be selected on the basis of their own merit, their selection cannot be counted against the quota reserved for the categories that they belong.
Relying on the law laid down, the Court ruled that the respondent-candidates were required to be adjusted against the general category as admittedly they were more meritorious than the last of the general category candidates appointed and that their appointments could not have been considered against the seats meant for reserved category.
"Consequently, after considering their appointments in the general category, the seats meant for reserved category were required to be filled in from and amongst the other remaining reserved category candidates on merit such as respondent No.1 herein."
The Court therefore upheld the High Court's view.
"If such a procedure would have been followed, the original applicant – respondent No.1 would have got appointed on merit in the reserved category seats in the vacancy caused due to the above procedure. Therefore, as such the High Court has not committed any error in observing and holding that the aforesaid two candidates, namely, Mr. Alok Kumar Yadav and Mr. Dinesh Kumar, will have to be adjusted against the general category candidates and accordingly respondent No.1 being a reserved category candidate and being at Sr. No.1 in the waiting list of reserved category was to be appointed."
Noting that the re-shuffling shall cost general category candidates their seats, the Court directed their retention for balance as they are working since long and it may unsettle the entire selection process.
Case Title: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr. Versus Sandeep Choudhary & Ors.
Case Details: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8717 OF 2015; APRIL 28, 2022
Coram: Justice M R Shah and Justice B V Nagarathna
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
