New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified an important principle regarding reservation and recruitment rules, holding that reserved category candidates who avail benefits such as age relaxation cannot later seek selection against general category vacancies if the recruitment notification explicitly bars such migration.
A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi delivered the verdict while hearing a case connected to the Staff Selection Commission’s (SSC) Constable (GD) recruitment. The notification prescribed an age limit of 18 to 23 years, with candidates from Other Backward Classes (OBC) receiving a three-year relaxation. The respondents had applied under the OBC category and availed this relaxation. While they scored more marks than the last selected candidate in the general category, their marks were lower than the last selected OBC candidate, leading to their non-selection.
Aggrieved, they approached the High Court, which ruled in their favour and directed that they be considered for general category seats on merit. The Union government challenged this decision in the Supreme Court.
The apex court overturned the High Court’s judgment, observing that the latter had wrongly relied on Jitendra Kumar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2010). In that case, Uttar Pradesh’s special statutory provisions allowed such migration. By contrast, in the present matter, the Office Memorandum (OM) specifically prohibited candidates availing age relaxation from being considered in the general category.
Justice Bagchi remarked that whether a reserved category candidate, who had availed fee or age relaxation, can be appointed in the general category depends entirely on the recruitment rules. If rules or notifications do not prohibit it, then such candidates may be selected in general seats provided their marks exceed those of the last general category candidate. However, if the rules explicitly bar it, they cannot migrate.
The bench also referred to the precedent of Saurav Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2020), where it was held that migration is possible only when no special concession is taken and the recruitment scheme allows it.
Since the SSC rules in the present case contained a clear prohibition, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s ruling and upheld the Union government’s appeal.
