Reserved category candidates qualifying on own merit must be treated as unreserved category candidates.

The petitioner served as a contractual Communication Assistant from 2000 to 2015

In 2009, an advertisement was issued for the post of Data Entry Operator, providing 12 total posts, including 6 for the unreserved (UR) category

Although the petitioner applied as an Other Backward Class (OBC) candidate, he secured 51.7 marks, placing him at serial No. 5 in the overall merit list

The State’s affidavit confirmed that because the petitioner failed to submit a valid OBC social status certificate, he was not granted age relaxation reserved for OBC candidates; he only received relaxation based on his prior contractual service, a benefit available to all eligible contractual employees

Despite his merit-based selection within the top six positions, the respondents notified and treated him as an OBC candidate in the appointment order

The petitioner sought a direction to be treated as an unreserved category candidate and claimed unpaid salary and consequential benefits

Whether a reserved category candidate who qualifies for a post on their own merit within the unreserved quota without availing of category-specific benefits must be treated as an unreserved category candidate.

The Court relied on the principle that reserved category candidates who qualify on their own merit for non-reserved posts should not be counted against the reserved quota but must be treated as general category candidates

This was established in R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab, which held that merit-based placement in the select list dictates the category

It further applied Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, clarifying that vertical reservation candidates may compete for non-reserved posts on merit

Bihari Lal Rada v. Anil Jain (Tinu), which defined "general category" as open seats available to all qualified candidates regardless of caste or community

The Court observed that the petitioner secured the 5th position in a merit list where 6 posts were earmarked for the unreserved category

Crucially, the State admitted that no OBC-specific age relaxation or reservation benefits were extended to the petitioner because he failed to produce a valid social status certificate

The relaxation he did receive was predicated on his status as a contractual employee, not his caste status

Applying the precedents of Nitin Ramekar v. State of Chhattisgarh and the Supreme Court decisions cited therein, the Court reasoned that since the petitioner's selection was achieved on his own merit against a post available to the general public, the respondents erred in categorizing him under the OBC quota

The Court determined that his placement at serial No. 5 entitled him to be classified as a General category candidate

The Court held that a candidate who achieves a rank within the unreserved merit without utilizing reservation benefits (such as age relaxation for social status) cannot be relegated to a reserved category list

The respondents were ordered to modify his status accordingly