Parity between private, PSU, and government employees' wards for determining OBC Non-Creamy Layer reservation status.

The applicant, currently a trainee at the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), challenged an order dated July 23, 2023, issued by the Department of Personnel, Training and Grievances (DoPT)

The applicant sought a direction to the respondents to allot and accommodate him in the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) under the Other Backward Class (OBC) category based on the recruitment notice dated February 2, 2022

The applicant contended that the legal issue governing his eligibility for reservation had been settled by a recent Supreme Court decision

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be accommodated in the IAS under the OBC category based on the principles of reservation and the Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) criteria

2. Whether the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Rohith Nathan & Ors. is applicable to the applicant's claim

The Tribunal primarily relied on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Rohith Nathan & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 2827-2829/2018), decided on March 11, 2026

The Supreme Court held that treating employees of private entities and PSUs differently from government employees regarding NCL entitlement constitutes hostile discrimination and violates the principle of equality

The Court further mandated the creation of supernumerary posts to accommodate successful candidates who satisfy the NCL criteria

The Tribunal observed that the counsel for both parties acknowledged that the issue in the present O.A. was identical to the matter resolved in the Rohith Nathan judgment

By citing paragraphs 40 to 44 of the Apex Court's judgment, the Tribunal highlighted that the government is obligated to consider claims of candidates and intervenors in accordance with the NCL principles clarified therein

Consequently, without examining the respondents' counter-affidavit contentions in depth, the Tribunal determined that the applicant's claim must be re-evaluated by the respondents through the lens of the Supreme Court's latest interpretation of OBC reservation eligibility

The respondents are ordered to complete this exercise within six months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order

No order was made as to costs