Meritorious reserved category candidates may migrate to reserved quotas to secure higher post preferences without encroaching on open vacancies.

The six applicants, belonging to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category, applied for Level-1 posts in the North Eastern Railway under notification CEN No. RRC-01/2019

They qualified for the CBT and PET and underwent medical examinations

While 403 posts were reserved for EWS, the applicants were not included in the provisional panels. Upon RTI inquiry, they discovered that 60 EWS candidates, who initially qualified on open merit (Unreserved/UR), were shifted back to the EWS quota to secure their higher preference of posting

The applicants challenged this "migration," alleging it reduced the available EWS vacancies and denied them appointment

An interim order on 30.05.2024 directed six posts to be kept vacant

1. Whether meritorious reserved category candidates (specifically EWS) who qualify on open merit can be shifted to their reserved category to ensure they receive a higher preference of post.

2. Whether the "Select List Preparation Protocol" adopted by the Railways, which allows such migration, is legally sustainable and consistent with constitutional principles of reservation.

The Tribunal applied the "Select List Preparation Protocol" for CEN-01/2019, specifically Para 3.4, which mandates that a candidate should not be offered a lower option post as UR if they can be offered a higher choice post in their own community

It relied on the Supreme Court precedents in Union of India v. Ramesh Ram [(2010) 7 SCC 234], upholding Rule 16(2) of the CSE Rules, which allows meritorious reserved candidates to migrate to the reserved category for service allocation

It relied on Alok Kumar Pandit v. State of Assam [(2012) 8499 of 2012], establishing that a meritorious reserved candidate cannot be compelled to accept an inferior post compared to a less meritorious candidate of the same category

It further cited Rajasthan High Court v. Rajat Yadav [2025 INSC 1503], affirming that reservation should function as a means of inclusion rather than a disadvantage to the meritorious

The Tribunal reasoned that the Railways' protocol ensures "inter-se merit" among reserved category candidates. If migration were prohibited, an anomalous situation would arise where a less meritorious EWS candidate (who qualified only under the EWS quota) would receive a more preferred post, while a more meritorious EWS candidate (who qualified on UR merit) would be "punished" with a less preferred post due to limited UR options

The court found that the 60 EWS candidates were shifted back to the EWS category strictly in accordance with Para 3.4 of the Protocol to protect their higher post preferences

Consequently, the applicants, who ranked lower in the EWS merit list than the last selected candidate (after accounting for the migrated meritorious candidates), had no valid claim to the posts

The O.A. was dismissed, the interim stay was merged with the final order, and all miscellaneous applications were disposed of. The court concluded there was no flaw in shifting meritorious EWS candidates to the EWS quota for post-allotment purposes