GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS. versus PRADEEP KUMAR & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 1056 · Decided: 24-10-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1056
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS.
v.
PRADEEP KUMAR & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8259 of 2019)
OCTOBER 24, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI, A. S. BOPANNA AND
HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Service Law:
Recruitment – Of Special Education Teachers – In the NCT
of Delhi – Essential qualification wherefor inter-alia was Central
Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) – For reservation in OBC Category,
the recruitment advertisement required such candidates to possess
caste certificate issued by Govt. of Delhi – Respondents/candidates,
who had CTET qualification by availing 5% relaxation in the
qualifying marks in the CTET from their respective States (not Delhi)
applied under reserved category of OBC and appeared in written
test – They were denied candidature as not eligible because they
were CTET qualified as OBC outsider, and not from Delhi – Original
Application against the order rejecting their candidature was
allowed by Central Administrative Tribunal directing the authorities
to appoint the candidates by considering their merit position in the
unreserved category – Tribunal’s order was upheld by High Court
– Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: Since the candidates are not
certified as OBC by Govt. of NCT of Delhi they cannot be considered
eligible in the OBC category – They also cannot be considered
against unreserved category because there is an express bar under
Office Memoranda on migration to unreserved category of those
reserved category candidates, who had availed of relaxation in the
qualification.
Reservation – Principles of reservation under the Constitution
are intended to be confined to a specifically earmarked category
and the unreserved category must be protected to avoid dilution of
competence and merit.
 [2019] 13 S.C.R. 1056
1056
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1057
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. For reservation in the OBC category under
Clause 6 (iii) of Advertisement No.1/13, the OBC candidates were
required to be in possession of caste certificate issued by the
Govt. of Delhi only. Therefore, in the Delhi recruitment process,
the respondents did not possess OBC (Delhi) certificate and thus
they could not be considered for the OBC category vacancies.
Further, as per the CTET guidelines, unreserved candidates are
required to obtain 60% marks to qualify in the CTET.  Since the
Respondents obtained less than 60% in CTET, their candidature
could be valid only under the OBC category.  However due to
absence of certificate of OBC status by Government of NCT,
Delhi and by virtue of clause 6(iii) of the recruitment
advertisement which bars reservations to outsider OBC, the
Respondents are ineligible for the applied post. They may
however compete against the unreserved vacancies, if they pass
CTET with minimum 60% marks. Admittedly, none of the
Respondents are certified by the GNCT of Delhi as OBC and
neither do they possess the requisite 60% marks in CTET for
qualification for the one-tier exam, as per the Advertisement.
An OBC candidate not certified in the State/Territory outside of
Delhi cannot be eligible to avail of employment in reserved
category posts earmarked for OBCs who are certified by the Delhi
Government. [Paras 14, 15, and 23][1064-B-F; 1067-F]
2. The OMs dated 01.07.1998 and 04.04.2018 issued by
the Department of Personnel & Training issued specific
instructions to the effect that when a relaxed standard is applied
in selecting a reserved category candidate, in age limit,
experience, qualification, additional chances in written
examination etc., such candidates will be counted against
reserved vacancies. There is an express bar on migration to the
unreserved category of those reserved category candidates who
had availed of relaxation including those for qualification. The
prescription of the eligibility qua CTET, in the advertisement,
will therefore have to be understood bearing in mind, the contents
of the OM dated 01.07.1998. To apply the advertisement in the
present facts will not be correct. The same OM dated 01.07.1998.
GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS. v. PRADEEP KUMAR & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1058
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
There is an express bar on migration to the unreserved category
of those reserved category candidates who had availed of
relaxation including those for qualification. The prescription of
the eligibility qua CTET, in the advertisement, will therefore have
to be understood bearing in mind, the contents of the OM dated
01.07.1998. [Paras 21.1 and 22][1066-B-C;

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.