The main legal point established is the application of relaxed standards for reserved category candidates in the short-listing and selection process.

1. The respondent No.6 is not served. It is submitted by Mr. Abhinav Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant that irrespective of the view that this Court would take on the challenge made in the judgment dated 3rd of November, 2018 dismissing SWP No.2574/2017 in limini, the right of the respondent No.6 to appointment shall remain protected. In view thereof, this appeal is taken up for consideration with the consent of learned counsel for the parties who are present in the Court.

2. The appellant has assailed the order dated 3rd of November, 2017 whereby his writ petition challenging the appointment of private respondent No.6 before us, in open merit category, (though he had applied as a candidate in the RBA category), was rejected in limini.

3. In the selection process conducted pursuant to notification dated 19th of March, 2016 by the Public Service Commission for ten posts of Lecturer (10+2) in the discipline of Bio-technology, seven posts in the OM (open merit category), two posts in the RBA (Resident of Backward Areas) and one for SC (Scheduled Caste Category), the appellant featured at Sr. No.7 in the open merit category in the select list which was prepared. However, the Public Service Commission amended the select list by a notification dated 16th of October, 2017.

4. The petitioner was aggrieved by his removal from the select list on the ground that the private respondent No.6, namely, Irshad Ahmad Rather, had applied in the RBA category and should have been considered in this category and in spite of that he was selected in the open merit category, as has been done by the respondents-Public Service Commission. The petitioner has challenged that the respondent No.6 had enjoyed the benefit of relaxed standards at the time of short listing, as prescribed in the notification dated 12th of May, 2016, and therefore, respondent No.6, who had applied under RBA category, could not have been considered as a candidate in the open merit category at the time of final select list.

5. In support of his submission, our attention was drawn to the merit list which was drawn of short listed candidates in the order of merit. We are informed that while respondents conducted selection for seven candidates, as per the prescription, the respondents had applied the ratio of 1:4, in as much as, seven candidates had drawn up the same merit, the respondents had short listed 35 candidates in the open merit category. The list of the short listed candidates with their marks and merit has been placed on record. A bare perusal thereof would show that the candidates from Sr.No.14 to 17, have drawn 38 marks; candidates from Sr. No.20 to Sr. No.26 had drawn 37.50 marks; whereas candidates from Sr. No.28 to 35 had all drawn 37 marks. It is contended that after having short listing of these 35 candidates, the number of candidates who had to be short listed for participating in the further selection process in the open merit category stood exhausted.

6. Apart from the candidates in the open merit category, the respondents appear to have drawn up a list of candidates who had applied in the reserved categories. In respect of candidates under RBA category, are concerned, the respondents invited Sr. No.36-Aadil Yousaf Dar and Sr.No.37-Sachin Sharma, to participate in the selection process. Mr. Abhinav Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contends that in this background, so far as the respondent No.6 was concerned, he could be short listed only by application of relaxed standards. Mr. Abhinav Sharma has submitted that the cut off for being considered for further selection and to feature in the merit list, a candidate had to obtain the minimum 37 marks in the open merit category.

7. In view of the above, Mr. Sharma has contended that candidate at Sr. No.36-Sachin Sharma has secured 36 marks. Perusal of the short list in the order of merit, we find that so far as the respondent No.6-Irshand Ahmad Rathar is concerned, he has secured only 35.