Chandrabhan Patel vs State of M.P. and Another

Arun Mishra, J.

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is about the non selection for the post of Civil Judge Class-II.

In all 162 posts were advertised. Petitioner submitted an application as candidate of other backward class and was placed in the waiting list at Serial No. 1 of OBC category- The grievance of the petitioner is that certain OBC candidates who were having more marks than the last cut-off marks for the general category were accommodated in the OBC category as they were not within the age criteria prescribed for the general category candidates- Thus -the petitioner submits that the action of the Public Service Commission is illegal and candidates of the OBC category who had better marks than the last selected candidate of the general category ought to have been appointed in the general category candidate due to their non-appointment in general category candidate the petitioner has been deprived of appointment in the reserved category to other backward class.

It is admitted at bar and it was so mentioned in the advertisement that a person to be entitled for consideration in general category has to be below 32 years.

The stand of the respondent No. 2 in the return is that though the candidates of other backward classes mentioned at Serial No. 17-55 and 77 have secured more marks than the cut-off marks for unreserved category in the main examination. But, these three persons were more in age than fixed for general category candidates. Hence they have not been selected against unreserved post and selected in reserved category of OBC.

The petitioner has placed reliance on section 4(4) of the M.P. Lok Seva (Anusuchit Jativon. Anusuchit Jan Jatiyon Aur Anya Pichhade Vargon ke Liye Arakshan) Adhinyam, 1994 which reads thus:

"4-Fixation of percentage for reservation of posts.

(1)............

(2).............

(3)..............

(4) If a person belonging to any of the categories mentioned in sub-section (2) gets selected on the basis of merit in an open competition with general candidates, he shall not be adjusted against the vacancies reserved for such category under sub-section (2)."

True it is that if a person had obtained more marks than the last cut-off marks for unreserved category he has to be selected in the unreserved category not in the category of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/OBC. He has to be treated in unreserved category and shall not be adjusted against the vacancy reserved for such category as provided under sub-section (2) of section 4.

In the instant case advertisement prescribed the age for unreserved category to be 32 years and relaxation of age is given to reserved category candidate. Since a person above 32 years cannot be considered in the unreserved category. I find that when candidates of OBC at serial No. 17.55. 77 were above 32 years which fact is not disputed could not have been considered due to their age as an unreserved category candidate. They had participated due to relaxation of age for reserved category candidates in extended zone of consideration.

A DO letter dt. November, 13th 1990 issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensionsof Government of India prescribes that when a relaxed standard is applied in selecting SC/ST candidates: for example in the age limit experience qualification permitted number of chances in written examination, extended zone of consideration larger than what is provided for general category candidates etc. such candidates are not to be counted against reserved vacancies. These instructions contained in DO have been adopted by Public Service Commission on 31.12.1994. Do letter is quoted in extenso below:

Smt-Krishna Singh Joint Secretary-

Government of India Department of Personnel And Training, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions- New DELHI- November 13, 1990

Tele-No-3015010 D-O- No- 36012/22/90-Estt (SCT) Dear Shri Babu-

Kindly refer to your D.O. letter No. F-16/12/(1)/90-R (O&P) dated 26th June. 1990 requesting for clarification in respect of this Department''s O.M. No. 36012/13/88-Estt (SCT) Dated 22nd May, 1989.

We have considered the matter. At the very outset, I would like to clarify that the instructions contained in the OM., referred to above would apply in all types of direct recruitment - whether by written test alone or written test followed by interview or by interview alone.

In our O.M. dated 22-5-89 it is laid down that" in cases of direct recruitment to vacancies in posts under the Central Government the SC and ST candidates who are selected on their own merit without relaxed standards along with candidates belonging to the other communities will not be adjusted against the reserved share of vacancies;" Inter alia, this implies that those SC/ST candidates who are selected on the same standard as applied to general candidates, shall not be adjusted against the reserved share. Thus when a relaxed standard is applied in selecting SC/ST candidates, for example in the age limit, experience qualification permitted number of chances in written examination, extended zone of consideration than what is provided for general category candidates etc. such candidates are to be counted against reserved vacancies.

With regards.

Your sincerely. Sd/- (Smt- Krishna Singh)

Shri D. Basu. Additional Secretary. Union Public Service Commission. New Delhi.

It is clear that when age relaxation has been enjoyed by the OBC candidates and they were not within the age prescribed for unreserved category candidates which was 32 years, their candidature has been rightly considered against reserved category by the Public Service Commission. Thus, it is clear that no illegality has been done by the Public Service Commission in preparing the merit list.

Resultantly, I find no merit in this writ petition. Same is dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs as incurred.