SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Jhk) 1081

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, NAVNEET KUMAR, JJ.
Chandan, son of Late Deoki Paswan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
L.P.A. No. 231 of 2021, L.P.A. No. 275 of 2021, L.P.A. No. 279 of 2021, L.P.A. No. 302 of 2021
Decided on : 18-10-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Aparajita Bhardwaj, Advocate, Ms. Tanya Singh, Advocate, Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Apoorva Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Mr. Sushil Kumar Sharma, Mr. Sushil Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Prasad Joshi, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Prasad Joshi, Advocate

Candidates securing higher marks than unreserved category cannot claim reservation benefits unless explicitly provided by state policy; constitutional provisions require formal policy to confer reservation rights.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 16(1) and 16(4) - Claims for allocation under reserved category despite securing higher marks than unreserved candidates - Candidates argued they were disadvantaged despite merit - Court held policy under condition no. 8 adhered to - Candidates under reserved category treated as unreserved in absence of state policy for migration - Appeals dismissed (Paras 19-26, 30, 60).

(B) Administrative Law - Right to reservation - Court emphasized no constitutional right exists unless state policy enacted, maintaining legislative intent is vital (Paras 22, 39).

Facts of the case:
Candidates belonging to reserved categories secured higher marks than unreserved candidates but were allocated lesser services; grievances led to appeals after writ petitions were dismissed by single judge.

Findings of Court:
Court confirmed the allocation reflected adherence to state policy outlined in selection process; candidates chose to participate knowing selection conditions.

Issues: Whether such candidates are entitled to reservation benefits when treated under unreserved criteria; applicability of relevant judicial precedents discussed.

Ratio Decidendi: Constitutional provisions do not guarantee reservation rights unless formal policy exists; judicial precedent upheld by governmental policy contributes to fair allocation process.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. the appeal involves service allocation for candidates from reserved categories. (Para 1 , 3 , 5)
2. the candidates claim improper service allocation despite securing higher marks. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. court discusses the constitutionality of the service allocation norms. (Para 11 , 14 , 15)
4. constitutional provisions regarding equality and reservation are examined. (Para 20 , 23 , 30)
5. the appeal is ultimately dismissed based on legal interpretations. (Para 63 , 65)

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.:

1. The appeals are against the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in analogous cases, hence, all the appeals have been directed to be listed together for analogous hearing, as such, all the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order/judgment.

2. Reference of one order is also there dated 24.08.2022 to list this case after disposal of S.L.P. (C) No. 4310 of 2022, 4443 of 2022 and 5409 of 2022.

3. It has been informed at bar that the aforesaid S.L.P. have been disposed of.

4. The appeals under clause 10 of the LETTERS PATENT is directed against the order/judgment dated 07.06.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 1428 of 2020 and other analogous cases, whereby and whereunder, the writ petitions have been dismissed seeking therein direction upon the respondents that the writ petitioners who have got higher marks and have been selected in the open merit, allotted Jharkhand Information Service, Finance Service and Planning Service but, the candidates who have lesser marks in reserved category, to which the writ petitioners belong, have been allotted Jharkhand Administrative Service, hence, in such circumstances, the direction has been sought for to consider the candidature of the writ petitioners under reserved category with a further direction to allot them Jharkhand Administrative Service cadre. The writ petitions have been dismissed declining to pass positive direction, hence, the instant appeals.

5. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petitions, which require to be enumerated, read as under:

L.P.A. No. 231 of 2021:

The Appellant/petitioner belongs to the category of Scheduled caste reserve category candidate, fulfilling the requisite criteria having claimed reservation, applied for his appointment in Pursuant to Advertisement no. 23/2016 issued by the JPSC, for Jharkhand Administrative Service, Jharkhand Finance Service and Jharkhand Education Service Class-II, Jharkhand Cooperative Service, Jharkhand Social Security Service, Jharkhand Information Service, Jharkhand Police Service and Jharkhand Planning service.

The examination was to be completed in three parts i.e. Preliminary examination, Mains examination and interview. The admit card was issued to the petitioner showing the petitioner to be of Scheduled caste reserve category candidate and after clearing all the stages of the said examination he finally selected by obtaining 611 Marks out of 1150.

The writ petitioner/appellant submitted all his credentials including the caste certificate issued by competent authority ie S.D.O., Chhatarpur. The petitioner while filling up the main examination form has indicated the preference of service; the first preference of the petitioner was Jharkhand Administrative Service, the second preference was Jharkhand Police Service and the third preference was Jharkhand Finance Service and onwards.

The final result of the selected candidates was published vide dated 21.04.2020 and the petitioner's name has been mentioned in the final result in "Jharkhand Information Service" under unreserved category.

The petitioner was surprised that one Ajay Kumar Das and Taleshwar Ravidas, who also belongs to SC category secured 576 and 584 marks in total and their name have been recommended for the “Jharkhand Administrative Service” wherea

                      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                      1
                      2
                      3
                      4
                      5
                      6
                      7
                      8
                      9
                      10
                      11
                      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                      supreme today icon
                      logo-black

                      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                      Please visit our Training & Support
                      Center or Contact Us for assistance

                      qr

                      Scan Me!

                      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                      whatsapp-icon Back to top