Merit candidates can migrate to reserved category in civil services: court

The Supreme Court on Friday held that candidates in the ‘Meritorious Reserved Category' (MRC) selected on merit and placed in the ‘general/unreserved category' in the Central Civil Services Examination could be given a choice to opt for a service of higher preference in terms of Rule 16 (2) of the CSE Rules.


This rule says: “While making service allocation, candidates belonging to SC/ST or OBCs recommended against unreserved candidates may be adjusted against reserved vacancies by the government if by this process they get a service of higher choice in the order of their preference.”

A Constitution Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices S.H. Kapadia, R.V. Raveendran, B. Sudershan Reddy and P. Sathasivam said: “The reserved candidates belonging to the OBC/SC/ST categories who are selected on merit and placed in the list of general/unreserved category can choose to migrate to the respective reserved category at the time of allocation of services. Such migration as envisaged under Rule 16 (2) is not inconsistent with Rule 16 (1) or Articles 14, 16 (4) and 335 of the Constitution.”

The Centre appealed against a Madras High Court judgment holding ultra vires and unconstitutional Rule 16 (2) and directing it to rework service allocation dehors Rule 16 (2). Certain writ petitions were also filed. The Supreme Court stayed the judgment and referred the matter to a larger Bench.

Now, the CJI, writing the judgment, said: “MRC candidates who avail themselves of the benefit of Rule 16 (2) and are adjusted in the reserved category should be counted as part of the reserved pool for the purpose of computing the aggregate reservation quotas. The seats vacated by MRC candidates in the general pool will be offered to general category candidates.”

Two classes

The Bench said: “By operation of Rule 16 (2), the reserved status of an MRC candidate is protected so that his/her better performance does not deny him/her the chance to be allotted to a more preferred service. The amended Rule 16 (2) only seeks to recognise the inter se merit between two classes — (a) meritorious reserved category candidates and (b) relatively low ranked reserved category candidates — for the purpose of allocation to the various Civil Services with due regard for the preferences indicated by them.”

The Bench said: “When MRC candidates are put in the general list on their own merit they do not automatically relinquish their reserved status. By operation of Rule 16 (2) the reserved status of an MRC candidate is protected so that his/her better performance does not deny such candidate the chance to be allotted to a more preferred service.”

Procedural change in census questionnaire mooted

With a view to ensuring caste-based enumeration, the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission has suggested a procedural change in filling up the questionnaire prepared for the Census of 2011–Household Schedule.


In his opinion submitted to the State government on April 20 [which was released to the media on Saturday], Chairman of the Commission Justice M.S. Janarthanam stated that “for the systematic enumeration of castes, there is no need at all to amend or alter or add anything new to the questionnaire.” What was required to be done was to furnish the name of the caste in respect of “Others,” namely, Other Backward Classes, in the answer to question nos. 7 (i) and 7 (ii) under the column no. 8 and 9 of the questionnaire. [The questionnaire has a provision for enumerating Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes].

If this was done, the systematic enumeration of castes of “Others”, viz., OBCs and SC/STs would be complete and effective.

The Commission called for providing adequate training to enumerators in this regard. This could be done without any involvement of special or extra expenditure.

The indicators of other criteria for the determination of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, such as castes/classes regarded as socially backward, those mainly depending on manual labour for livelihood and those having student dropout in the age group of 7 to 15 years could be ascertained from the data available with the Statistics department of the respective States.

Mr. Justice Janarthanam said caste enumeration, carried out as suggested by him, would be authentic and it would enable the government to determine the question of a particular community or caste falling within the ambit of BC or MBC (Most Backward Classes) or otherwise, satisfying the members of such castes or communities demanding reconsideration of their status – BC, MBC or otherwise.

He urged the State government to seek the concurrence of the Union government for the proposed procedural changes which, in his opinion, may not pose any problem. He recalled the Commission's recommendation given in May 2007 to the State government, calling for a survey on socio-economic and educational conditions of the people.

The State government, in its press release, mentioned that it was making public the opinion of the Commission Chairman as this would be of use to the public and political parties under the present circumstances.