Reserved category candidates who avail age relaxation or relaxed qualifying standards cannot be adjusted against unreserved vacancies if an express embargo exists in the recruitment rules or office memoranda.

ORDER

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

By way of the present Original Application (O.A.), the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:-

“1. To quash and set aside the Order dated 25.03.2019 and the Final Result dt. 1.5.2014 to the extent it does not include the name of the applicant.

2. To quash and set aside the OM dt. 1.7.1998 holding it to be ultra-vires to the Constitutional Scheme of Reservation for OBCs.

3. To direct the respondents to consider these SC candidates who secured 90 or more marks and adjust them against the “UR category”, and consequently consider the applicant against these eight vacancies of “SC category”, in which he stands qualified as being the very next candidates in merit list and issue an appointment letter to him and appoint him to the post of ASI in DJB with all consequential benefits.

4. To award costs in favour of the applicant and

5. To pass any other order or orders which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem just and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

Vide order dated 22.05.2019, this Tribunal by way of an ad interim measure directed that the last appointment to the post of Assistant Sanitary Inspector in DJB in pursuance to recruitment No. 004/09 against the Post Code No. 74/09 shall be subject to outcome of the OA.

Brief facts of the case as narrated by learned counsel for the applicant are as under:-

2.1 The applicant is a graduate and belongs to the Scheduled Caste (SC) category. Respondent No.1, DSSSB, issued Recruitment Advertisement No. 004/2009 for filling up 49 posts of Assistant Sanitary Inspector (ASI) in Delhi Jal Board (DJB) under Post Code 74/09, comprising 23 UR, 15 OBC, 8 SC and 3 ST vacancies, including 5 Ex-Servicemen. The advertisement provided age relaxation to SC/ST/OBC and other reserved categories.

2.2 The applicant applied under the SC category pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement and was duly permitted to participate in the selection process. The selection process consisted of two stages, namely:

• Preliminary Examination (qualifying in nature), and

• Main Examination, on the basis of which the final merit list was to be prepared.

The minimum qualifying marks prescribed were 45% for UR and 35% for reserved categories in the Main Examination, out of 200 marks.

2.3 The applicant appeared in the Examination and secured total 85 marks, and was accordingly selected against the SC category vacancy in the Final Result dated 20.04.2012.

2.4 The said final result was subsequently challenged by certain candidates who had been declared ineligible on the ground of educational qualification. This Tribunal, vide judgment dated 13.02.2014 in OA No. 2049/2012, upheld their eligibility and directed DSSSB to prepare a revised result.

2.5 In compliance thereof, the DSSSB issued a Revised Final Result dated 01.05.2014, wherein the name of the applicant was excluded despite his earlier selection and merit position.

2.6 It is submitted that the revised result was prepared in an arbitrary and illegal manner, as candidates belonging to reserved categories were considered only against reserved vacancies and were not adjusted against UR vacancies, despite securing marks equal to or above the UR cut-off, contrary to settled law.

2.7 Several SC candidates, namely Harish Yadav, Rohit Rana and Shiv Kumar, who were within the age limit and had secured more than the qualifying marks, were confined to consideration under the reserved category alone.

2.8 The applicant secured 85 marks, whereas the UR cut-off was 90 marks, and there existed a