A subsequent open-merit vacancy does not create a reserved-category vacancy or entitlement to appointment.

The Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission advertised 50 posts of Medical Officer (Ayurvedic), including four posts reserved for the Scheduled Caste (SC) category.

The applicant secured 56.00 merit points, below the last selected SC candidate, who secured 56.75 points.

After two Open Merit (OM) selectees did not join, OM waiting-list candidates—including respondent No. 3, who had secured 60.88 points—were recommended against the resulting vacancies.

The applicant contended that Sandeep Kumar Bhagat, an SC selectee with 61.13 points, should instead have been adjusted against an OM vacancy, creating an SC vacancy for her.

Following an earlier direction to consider her representation, the Commission rejected her claim on 8 February 2022.

She challenged that order and respondent No. 3’s appointment before the Tribunal.

Whether an SC candidate already selected in the reserved category could be adjusted against a subsequent OM vacancy arising from non-joining, thereby creating an SC vacancy for the applicant.

Whether the applicant, who was below the last selected SC candidate and whose category’s advertised posts had been filled, was entitled to appointment or to relief against respondent No. 3’s appointment.

The application was brought under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The Tribunal recognised that a reserved-category candidate selected on their own merit in open competition may be considered against an unreserved vacancy, subject to the applicable reservation rules.

It also applied the principles that a waiting list does not create additional posts or confer an independent right to appointment, and that being next in merit does not entitle a candidate to appointment where the notified vacancies in the relevant category have been filled.

The Tribunal found that all four SC posts had been filled and that the applicant’s merit was below that of the last selected SC candidate.

The later vacancies arose from non-joining by OM candidates and were filled from the OM waiting list; the applicant had not shown that any SC vacancy had arisen or remained available.

Reassigning Sandeep Kumar Bhagat to an OM vacancy would require reopening the completed selection and disturbing appointments, and the difference between his merit and respondent No. 3’s merit did not, without an established rule violation, invalidate respondent No. 3’s recommendation.

The absence of an SC waiting list did not itself establish a right to appointment.

It dismissed the Original Application, declined to interfere with the Commission’s order dated 8 February 2022 or respondent No. 3’s appointment, made no order as to costs, and disposed of any pending miscellaneous applications.