SANJAY KUMAR, J

1. Leave granted only in SLP (C) No. 5817 of 2023.

2. One lapse on the part of the State is all it took to generate this litigation, impacting multitudes of job aspirants in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The lapse was the amendment of an existing service rule on Digitally signed by Nisha Khulbey Date: 2024.05.01 17:28:16 IST Reason:

Signature Not Verified 17.02.2020 which was recalled thereafter on 20.12.2021, restoring the rule to its original position, but in the interregnum that amended rule was applied to an ongoing recruitment process. This prompted several challenges before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur resulting in a spate of orders and directions leading up to these cases before us.

3. The Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (MPPSC) issued an advertisement on 14.11.2019 proposing to select candidates for 571 posts in the State services in accordance with the Madhya Pradesh State Service Examination Rules, 2015 (for brevity, ‘the Rules of 2015’).

The Rules of 2015 were framed in exercise of power under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The Madhya Pradesh State Service Examination-2019 was scheduled to be held by the MPPSC for filling up these posts, by conducting a preliminary examination followed by the main examination and interviews. The preliminary examination took place on 12.01.2020. The total number of candidates who registered for the preliminary examination stood at 3,64,877 but only 3,18,130 of them actually appeared for the examination. At that stage, on 17.02.2020, Rule 4 of the Rules of 2015 was amended by the State of Madhya Pradesh. Rule 4, as it stood prior to the amendment and to the extent relevant for the purposes of this adjudication, read as under:

‘Rule 4. Mode of preparation of select list. (1)(a)(i) On the basis of marks obtained in Preliminary Examination, candidates numbering 15 times the vacancies as advertised category wise will be declared successful for Main examination subject to the condition that candidates have scored minimum passing marks as may be specified by the Commission. In addition to this, all the other candidates who get marks equal to “Cut Off Marks” will also be declared successful for the main examination.

(ii) Firstly, a list of Candidates of unreserved category shall be prepared.

This list will include the candidates selected on the basis of the common merit from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, who have not taken any advantage/relaxation given to the concerned category.

(iii) Secondly, separate lists of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes will be prepared.

…… (d) A common list of successful candidates shall be prepared after the preparation of all four lists, and examination result will be declared thereafter. This list will be roll number wise.’

4. It is clear from a bare reading of the above Rule 4 that the result of the preliminary examination was to be declared by clubbing meritorious reservation category candidates, who had not availed any reservation benefit, with the meritorious unreserved category candidates and not with their respective reservation category candidates. While so, the amendment effected on 17.02.2020 brought about a sea change in this methodology. To the extent relevant, the amended Rule 4 of the Rules of 2015 read thus:

‘4. Mode of preparation of select list: -

(1)(a)(I) On the basis of marks obtained in Preliminary Examination, - category wise candidates numbering 15 times of the vacancies as advertised will be declared successful for Main examination subject to the condition that candidates have scored minimum passing marks as may be specified by the Commission. In addition to this, all the other candidates who get marks equal to “Cut Off Marks” will also be declared successful for the main examination.

(II) Separate Lists of