Candidates participating in selection processes cannot later challenge recruitment methodologies after being declared unsuccessful, unless they timely contest relevant notifications.

ORDER :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs :-

“a) The petitioner may be declared qualified for the Interview :

b) The Respondent may be directed to migrate the Petitioner from OBC Category to General-ESM Category: c) The Respondent may be directed to allow the Petitioner to appear in the interview;

d) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and properr may kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.”

2. The brief facts as noticed by this Court are that the respondents issued an advertisement dated 09.04.2024 notifying vacancies for recruitment to the Cadre of Civil Judge, 2024. The petitioner, possessing all requisite qualifications, applied for the aforementioned post under the OBC NCL category on 07.05.2024.

2.1 A corrigendum was issued by the respondent on 08.05.2024 i.e. on the last date of submitting the application whereby one post for Ex-Servicemen under General Category was notified. The petitioner, being an Ex-Serviceman, accordingly edited his application form to submit under the Ex-servicemen Category. Subsequently, the admission card was issued to the petitioner, who appeared in and successfully cleared the preliminary examination held on 23.06.2024, as per the result declared on 15.07.2024.

2.2 The respondent again issued a corrigendum dated 27.07.2024 whereby the cut-off marks in category of General (Ex- Servicemen) was issued. The petitioner, having qualified for the main examination, appeared therein on 31.08.2024 and 01.09.2024. The result for the same was declared on 01.10.2024 wherein the petitioner was declared unqualified for appearing in the interview. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Vikas Balia, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Sachin Saraswat, appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Ex- Servicemen reserved category candidate can claim general category seat under horizontal reservation based on merit. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had secured marks exceeding the minimum requirement for eligibility under the Ex-servicemen category.

3.1 Learned counsel further submitted that as per the corrigendum dated 08.05.2024, candidates belonging to the Ex- servicemen category were deemed eligible for interview upon obtaining minimum 30% marks in each law paper and 35% marks in aggregate in the main examination. Learned counsel also submitted that despite fulfilling these criteria, the petitioner was overlooked for migration from OBC NCL Category to General Category for Ex-servicemen reservation.

3.2 Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioner did not avail any age relaxation that could have barred his migration from OBC NCL category to General Ex-servicemen category. It was further contended that when horizontal reservation for women (special reservation) in general/open category is applied, candidates from all categories, including SC, ST, and OBC, are entitled to consideration against posts reserved for General Category (Woman).

3.3 Learned counsel further submitted that posts reserved for General category (Ex-servicemen) were available to all Ex- servicemen candidates, necessitating migration. It was further contended that though the petitioner was permitted to apply under Ex-servicemen category within OBC NCL, but the reservation was actually available under General Ex-servicemen Category. It was further submitted that the petitioner's case merits consideration under General Category (Ex-servicemen) as reserved category candidates can claim general category seats under horizontal reservation based on merit.

3.4 In support of the aforementioned submissions, learned counsel has relied upon the following judgments :-

i. Deependra Yadav & ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., reported in AIR 2024 SC 2147.

ii. Ramnresh & Ors. VS. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.9628/202