Case Note & Summary
The Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) invited applications for 440 Gazetted Probationers posts, including 55 Assistant Commercial of Commercial Taxes posts. Of these, 44 were in the residual cadre and 11 were earmarked for the Hyderabad-Karnataka region under Article 371(J) of the Constitution. The first respondent, a government servant working as a lecturer, applied under the 2A Rural category reserved for Hyderabad-Karnataka region. He participated in the examinations and secured 1130 marks, which placed him among the toppers. However, because he was a government employee, he fell under the creamy layer and thus became ineligible for reservation benefits. Before the final select list was published, he made a representation on 31.03.2017 requesting that he be considered under the General Merit category instead of the reserved category. Despite this, his name appeared in the provisional select list under the 2A category. The candidate selected under General Merit in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region had secured only 1124.75 marks, less than the respondent's 1130. Aggrieved, the respondent approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal which, by order dated 01.06.2018, directed KPSC to consider him under the General Merit category. KPSC filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash the Tribunal's order. The High Court framed the short question: whether the respondent should have been slotted against a general merit post. The court held that the issue was no longer res integra, referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Sadhana Singh Dangi vs. Pinki Asati (2021 SCC OnLine SC 1329), which reiterated the settled principle that reserved category candidates, if they secure higher marks than the general category cut-off, are entitled to be selected in the open/general category on their own merit, and such selection cannot be counted against the reserved quota. Applying this principle, the High Court found that the respondent, having outscored the last selected general category candidate, was rightly directed by the Tribunal to be considered under General Merit. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Reservation and Creamy Layer - Migration of Reserved Category Candidate to General Merit - Constitution of India, Article 371(J) - The candidate, who was in government service and thus fell under creamy layer, had applied under reserved category but secured 1130 marks, which was higher than the last selected general category candidate (1124.75 marks) in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region; he requested consideration under general category prior to final selection; the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal directed KPSC to consider him under general merit; held that the principle that a reserved category candidate is entitled to be selected in open/general category on the basis of their own merit is well-settled, and such selection cannot be counted against the reserved quota; therefore, the tribunal's order was upheld (Paras 2-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a candidate who applied under a reserved category but later falls under creamy layer and secures higher marks than the last selected general category candidate is entitled to be considered under the general merit category?
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's order. The Court held that the principle of migration of reserved category candidates to general category on merit is well-settled, and the respondent, having secured higher marks than the general merit candidate in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region, was entitled to be considered under the general category.
Law Points
- Creamy layer candidates cannot claim reservation benefits
- Candidates from reserved categories are entitled to be selected in open/general category on merit
- such selection cannot be counted against reserved quota
