WPSB/542/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 2899 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPSB No. 542 of 2022
                                  Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
                                  Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. C.S. Rawat, Mr. Anil Anthwal and Mr. Digvijay Singh Bisht, Advocates for the petitioner.

Issue notice.

Notice has been accepted by Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, learned counsel on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2.

The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to the O.B.C. Category and a Certificate of O.B.C. Category of Uttarakhand has been issued in her favour by the Competent Authority, however, she does not have an O.B.C. Category Certificate from the Central Government. She applied for the post of Assistant Professor (Geography) advertised by the respondent-University. Her grievance is that the respondent- University would not consider her candidature for the General Category post, even though she is qualified.

Mr. Gupta, learned counsel, who appears on advance notice on behalf of the respondent-University, submits that applications were invited category-wise and a candidate belonging to a reserved category would be considered only under the said category. Therefore, according to him, an O.B.C. Category candidate would not be considered against the General Category post, even though he/she may be more meritorious than the General Category candidate.

The said procedure adopted by the respondents clearly appears to be illegal and unconstitutional.

We direct the respondents to file their counter affidavit within two weeks.

In the meantime, we direct that the respondents shall ensure compliance with the law, as laid down by the Supreme Court in R.K. Sabharwal & others Vs. State of Punjab & others, (1995) 2 SCC 745. The Supreme Court in this judgment, inter alia, observed:

"4. When a percentage of reservation is fixed in respect of a particular cadre and the roster indicates the reserve points, it has to be taken that the posts shown at the reserve points are to be filled from amongst the members of reserve categories and the candidates belonging to the general category are not entitled to be considered for the reserved posts. On the other hand the reserve category candidates can compete for the non-reserve posts and in the event of their appointment to the said posts their number cannot be added and taken into consideration for working out the percentage of reservation."

Further interviews undertaken by the respondents shall be subject to further orders of this Court.

No appointment shall be made in the meantime.

List on 24.11.2022.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)      (Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)
      09.09.2022                    09.09.2022
A/NT