LexGAURAV PRADHAN & ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
• [2017) 8 S.C.R. 951 GAURAV PRADHAN & ORS. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (Civil Appeal No.8351 of2017) AUGUST 18, 2017 [A.K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.] A B Service law - Recruitment - Migration of reserved category candidates against general category vacancies - The Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 - r.7 -Advertisements in C 2010 inviting applications for selection on posts of Constables and Sub-Inspector of Police - During process of selection, the State Government issued a circular dated 11.05.2011 providing that candidates of SC/ST/BC irrespective of whether they have availed of any concession including relaxation in age, shall be migrated against general category vacancies if they secured more marks than D the last candidate of general category - Writ petitions filed by general category candidates challenging the said circular - Held: Circular ·dated 11.05.2011 was issued by the State during the process of recruitment - However, the recruitment process in the present case had begun prior to the issuance of said circular, when circular dated E 24.06.2008 ,was in force which provided that reserved category candidates who have taken concession like age relaxation were not entitled to be migrated into the general category - Hence, the subsequent circular dated 11.05.2011 cannot be applied in the present recruitment - Thus, candidates belonging to SC/ST/BC who had taken relaxation of age were not entitled to be migrated to the F unreserved vacancies - However, the State·of Rajasthan has migrated such candidates against the unreserved vacancies which resulted in displacement of a large number of candidates who were entitled to be selected against the unreserved category vacancies - Further, such reserved category candidates have been working for G more than last jive years - In view of the fact, that such candidates were not at fault in any manner, they are allow.ed to continue in .respective posts - While, the unreserved candidates who could not be appointed due to the above illegal migration are also entitled for appointment as per their merit - Therefore, directions issued for adjusting the equity between the parties - Equity. H 951 952 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017) 8 S.C.R. A Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The State had come up with circular dated 11.05.2011 which was issued during process of recruitment. It clearly provided that candidates belonging to reserved category irrespective of having availed any of the special concessions B secure bench mark prescribed for general/open category candidates if selected, such a reserved category candidate shall be counted against unreserved/open category candidates. [Para 30) [968-H; 969-A-BJ 1.2 Further, the State of Rajasthan has issued circular dated c 26.07.2017 which was the reiteration of earlier position as was provided by circular dated 24.06.2008 which provided that candidates belonging to reserved category who have obtained concession of age are not eligible to be migrated to the unreserved vacancies • Thus, the position is now well accepted even by State of Rajasthan that those candidates belonging to D SC/ST/BC who have obtained concession of age are not eligible to be migrated to the unreserved vacancies. Circular dated 24.06.2008 being very much in existence holds the field and the State of Rajasthan was obliged to not migrate those SC/ST/BC category candidates who are in unreserved category, who have E. taken concession of age. [Para 39) [976-D[ Deepa E. V. vs. Union of India. 2017 (5) SCALE 424 - held applicable. 1.3 Rule 7(1) of The Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 expressly provides that "reservation of vacancies F for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be in accordance with the orders of the Government for such reservation in (orce at the time of recruitment i.e. bv direct recruitment and bv promotion". The circular of the Government which was in force at the time of recruitment shall be treated to be in force for the G purpose of reservation. In the present case, when the recruitment was commenced by the advertisement dated 7.10.2010 and 25.10.2010 at that time only circular dated 24.06.2008 was in force, hence, subsequent circular dated 11.05.2011 cannot be applied in the present recruitment. (Para 46) (979-F-GJ H .!, GAURAV PRADHAN & ORS. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 953 1.4 The candidates belonging to SC/ST/
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.