Published on: April 29, 2022 at 07:05 IST
Supreme Court upheld the judgment of High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur Bench, vide which, High Court has dismissed the writ petition and has confirmed the judgment which allowed the said application preferred by the respondent herein– original applicant and directed the appellant herein– BSNL to consider his candidature if sufficient vacancies exist for placement of the candidates of Other Backward Class.
The Supreme Court recently ruled more meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against seats meant for unreserved candidates.
The contentions on the part of the Appellant:
1. That the two candidates mentioned above, namely Mr Alok Kumar Yadav and Mr Dinesh Kumar, were rightly considered in the reserved category pool.
2. That if the view taken by the High Court is accepted and the two OBC candidates are adjusted in the general category, and thereby vacancies so created in the OBC category would have to be filled in by respondent herein – original applicant, which would result in shuffling of the candidates and would unsettle the entire selection process.
3. That the High Court has failed to take note of the fact that vacancies in the general category were only five and were already filled in, and therefore, insertion of two OBC candidates into the general category select list would expel two already selected candidates of general category.
The respondent vehemently opposed the appellant by contending:
1. That the reserved category candidates having obtained more marks than the last candidate in general category candidates will have to be adjusted against the general category quota.
2. That these two candidates secured more marks than the last of the general category candidates selected and appointed, and therefore those two candidates were required to be adjusted and/or considered against the general category pool.
That relying on previously decided cases, the Apex Court stated that how the candidates aggrieved by the non-appointment could have been adjusted and appointed earlier, they said the reservation seats allocated for the OBC candidates were needed to be adjusted against general category candidates according to their merit because they were more qualified than the last of the general category candidates appointed, and their appointments could not be considered against reserved category seats.
That as a result of the above-stated statement, 2 posts from the reserved category will be vacant and must be filled by other reserved category students like the respondent.
“Mr Alok Kumar Yadav and Mr. Dinesh Kumar, belonging to OBC category, 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.”, The Court said.
That the Apex Court stated that it could not be disputed that by reshuffling and insertion of two OBC candidates into the general category select list, two general category candidates already appointed shall have to be expelled and/or shall have to be removed.
That for that reason, we, under Article 142, pass a proposal that even if these candidates do get appointed, the candidate of the general category shall not be removed and be allowed to continue to work.
“In exercise of the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, we propose to pass an order that on reshuffling and on respondent No.1– original applicant being appointed now against the reserved category seats and while the aforesaid two candidates, namely, Mr. Alok Kumar Yadav and Mr. Dinesh Kumar, belonging to reserved category, to be treated in the general category seats, two candidates already appointed and belonging to general category shall not be removed.”, The Court said.
As a result, the Apex Court upheld the judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur Bench, stating that the High Court had correctly adjudicated the question of the appointment. The deserving candidates must be appointed, and the already appointed personals shall not be removed.