By this writ petition the four petitioners challenged the preliminary test result (PT) of 53rd to 55th Combined Competitive Examination held by Bihar Public Service Commission. Their challenge is that while publishing the result of preliminary test, the Bihar Public Service Commission could not give effect to reservation. In other words, the challenge is that in so far as preliminary test is concerned, the test being for deciding eligibility, reservation, which is applicable for appointment cannot be made applicable. It would further be the submission of the petitioners that in case the cut off mark is lowered for the reserved category candidate then it must be lowered generally for all. Providing for reservation at this stage and not lowering the cut off mark for all would be violative of Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition petitioner no.3, who was a reserved category candidate passed the main examination. He is as such not contesting this writ petition.

3. During the pendency of the writ petition two interlocutory applications were filed. In the first interlocutory application a prayer has been made to stay the reservation in preliminary test result and in second interlocutory application a prayer has been made to stay the declaration of the main examination result and not to publish the main examination. No order has been passed on those interlocutory applications as yet. In view of the fact that the writ petition has been heard at length and is being finally disposed of, no order need be passed on those interlocutory applications.

4. Counter affidavit and rejoinder have been filed. Pleadings being complete with the consent of the parties the writ petition has been heard for final disposal at this stage itself.

5. Considering the urgency of the matter as the main examinations have already been held and the interviews thereafter have already been conducted but as per undertaking given by Principal Additional Advocate General, final result has been with-held awaiting the decision of the Court.

6. To begin with one must refer to Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India, which reads as follows:

“16. Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment- (1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. “

7. But this has exceptions in Article 16 itself that is Article 16(4) and Article 335 of the Constitution of India. It is in pursuance to these exception clauses the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (For Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes)Act, 1991 was enacted. Section 4 provides for reservation for direct recruitment which , inter alia, provides that all appointments to services and posts in the State Government shall be regulated by making provisions for appointment of persons from various reserved category totaling to 50% as provided in Sub-section 2 of Section 4 thereof. From the above, it would be seen that the Constitution and the law envisage reservation at the stage of appointment. This is of significance. The law no where contemplates reservation in any process by which the selections on basis of eligibility are to be made which, after another examination on merit, may ultimately result in appointment. It is on basis of this that the learned counsel for the petitioners urges that preliminary test being not to judge the merit of the candidate but to judge his eligibility for the main examination, reservation cannot be provided. At this stage the process is more of elimination than of selection. On the other hand, Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Principal Additional Advocate General, on behalf of Bihar Public Service Commission submits that unless adequate number of reserved category candidate get through in the preliminary stage for the main examinations granting reservation at the stage of appointment might beca