This writ appeal challenged the dismissal of a petition contesting the inclusion of reserved category candidates in the unreserved select list. The Division Bench held that the Examination Rules do not prohibit such inclusion and dismissed the appeal.
The writ appeal was dismissed summarily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
a»:
WM
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
D.B.: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Sinha & Hcn’ble Mr. Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
WRIT APPEAL NO.101I2012
APPELLANT Ravindra Singh aged about 38 years,S/oShriB.R.Singh,R/o New Shiva Colony, Near Sheettala Mandir, Kaurinbhata, Rajnandgaon
Versus
WRIT APPEAL NO.101I2012
WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2 1 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH (APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH} AC’I‘, 2006
Appearance :
Mr. Parag Kotecha, Counse! for the appenant‘ Mr. UNS Deo, Government Advocate for the respondent No.1 /State Mr. B.D. Guru, Counsel for respondent No.2. , ORAL ORDER (12.03.2012)
The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.
Heard on LA. No.01.
On due consideration, LA. No.01 is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Also heard on admission.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 18‘“ of October 2011 passed in W.P.(S) No.3504/2009. By the impugned order, the writ petition filed by the appellant/petitioner has been dismissed by the writ Court.
Mr. Parag Kotecha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/petitioner, submits that in the Preiiminary Examination of 2008, the Public Service Commission (PSC) has preparedseparate lists for candidates belonging to unreserved category and candidates belonging to reserved categories. His submission is that inclusion of the candidates belonging to Schedules Castes, Scheduled Tribes and O.B.C. in the select list of unreserved category was not proper and was against the provisionsofRule3(i)of the Examination Rules.
We have considered the provisions of Rule 3 (l).
MWRW‘ APPEAL No.10 1/20 12
Rufe 3 (i) prescribes that the candidates obtaining minimum marks in the preliminary examinations as may be fixed by the Commission in their discretion, shaii be arranged in the order of marks obtained by them. Out of these candidates oniy about as many as equai to fifteen times at the most the totai number of posts under various categories, Witt be deemed to quaiih/ forthe Main Examination and the resuits of the preiiminary examination shall be announced acoordingty. The liet of candidates belonging to Unreserved Category, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and OBC ‘prepared‘qualifying for main examination shail be separateiy and their results announced accordingly. Preliminary Examination will only serve as a screening test for selecting candidates for the Main Examination and marks obtained in this examination will not be considered at the time of final selection of candidates. This rule does not provide that a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or OBC cannot be included in the iist of unreserved category.
in Indra Sawhne & Others vs. Union of India and others 1392 Sn I. 3 S.C.C. 21 the Supreme “In Court held that this connection it is well to remember that the reservations under Articfe 16(4) do not operate like a communal reservation. It may well happen that some members belonging to, say, Scheduled Castes get seiected in the open competition lie/d on the basis of their own merit; they will not be counted against the quota reserved for Scheduied Castes; they Wi/I be treated as open competition candidates.” The writ Court, relying on various decisions of the Supreme Court including Indra Sawney (Supra), did not tind any force in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner that the candidates beionging to Scheduled
3g
WRIT APPEAL No.131l2012 M
Castes, Scheduled Tribes or OBC cannot be included in the list of candidates belonging to unreserved category. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the grounds taken in the writ appeal, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in ihe impugned order passedby the writ Court. The writ appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. ‘
Shyna
Sd/— sw3m KUMAR smHA y ManindraMohanShr'VaStava I
“i
2 issues framed by the court
Whether candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, or OBC can be included in the select list for the unreserved category.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the writ petition suffers from any infirmity or illegality.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Indra Sawhne & Others vs. Union of India and othersReferred¶28
Indra Sawhne & Others vs. Union of India and others 1392 Sn I. 3 S.C.C. 21
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ravindra Singh
The State of Chhattisgarh
The Chhattisgarh Public Service Commissioner
Vivek Shukla
Bhupendra Mishra
Y.K. Dewangan
Sunil Kumar Sinha
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
