The Punjab & Haryana High Court while quashing the result of PGT (Mathematics), wherein a reserved category candidate was not considered in the selection list of a screening test despite scoring higher than the candidates selected in the un-reserved merit list observed that there is no justification to categorise the candidates for shortlisting and during the process of selection as it compromises merit and further militates against the rule of migration in the reservation.
Brief Facts:
The present petition was filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the result of the screening test, and exam scheme vide which the petitioner had not been selected for appearing in the 'Subject Knowledge Test' for the post of Post Graduate Teacher/PGT- Mathematics by Haryana Public State Commission.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the Scheme of Exam followed by the respondents is contrary to the settled law on the issue of reservation, that the reserved category candidates are to be considered against un-reserved/general posts at first instance and further the short-listing of candidates on the basis of their respective reserved categories, is contrary thereto as it prevents them from being considered for selection against general/un-reserved posts on the basis of merit, irrespective of the category they belong to
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent contended that the petition is not maintainable because the petitioner herself participated in the selection process, and only after remaining unsuccessful in the screening test she approached this Court impugning that very process that is impermissible. Once she has accepted the terms and conditions of the advertisement and the selection process has also begun, she cannot be allowed to turn around and challenge the same. Secondly, he has contended that the petitioner has challenged the selection process without impleading the affected parties. None of the successful candidates who qualified for the screening test as per the impugned result, dated 6.10.2023, has been impleaded as a party to the petition, though they would be affected by its outcome. This also renders the petition not maintainable. Further, it has been contended that the issue raised herein has already been settled against the petitioner by two Division Bench judgments of this Court rendered in the case of Naveen Rao v. State of Haryana and others and Gur Jai Pal Singh v. Punjab Public Service Commission and others.
Observations of the Court:
The court noted that result of screening test has been declared category-wise, i.e., by categorising candidates on the basis of the reserved categories they belong to and confining them within these categories to determine eligibility for the subject knowledge test and resultantly, the petitioner who, as per the data provided in the petition and not specifically denied by the respondents, secured 41.85 marks as BC (B) category candidate and could not be selected for the subject knowledge test; whereas, the general category candidates who secured less marks, as compared to her, have been so selected which is not the intent of rule of reservation.
Further, the court stated that the rule of migration has to be given full effect, and the appropriate manner to do so is by categorising the candidates in their respective categories only at the time of drawing the final merit list, and not at any stage prior thereto and denying the petitioner from considering in the unreserved category despite scoring higher than the cut-off list, has robbed her of the right to be considered for selection and appointment against the open/un-reserved posts on her own excellence.
Further, it was stated by the court that if a candidate is categorised resulting in his/her ouster from the process of selection before the final merit list is drawn, it will deprive such a candidate from being considered against open/un-reserved posts on merit and categorisation of candidates on the basis of their respective reserved categories during the process of selection, is bad in law and will be opposed to the rule of migration in reservation, which presupposes equality of opportunity and a level playing field in judging comparative merit of the candidates.
The court stated that the correct method to give effect to the rule is, to draw only the final merit list on the basis of reserved categories of candidates; and, at that stage, before drawing the selection list, the meritorious among the reserved category candidates be first considered for selection against open/un-reserved posts and the one who is able to secure an open/unreserved post on merit will have to be first offered the same; the candidate next in merit in that specific reserved category is to fill the vacancy so caused and in the present case, Scheme of Exam being followed by the respondents for making selection to the advertised posts, is contrary to the rule of reservation
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to revise the screening test result and proceed with the process of selection for the advertised posts in accordance with the law without categorizing the candidates till the final merit list is drawn.
Case Title: Parmila vs State of Haryana and anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya
Case No.: CWP No.23917 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Vivek Salathia
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Parveen Mehta and Mr. Kanwal Goyal
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
