Reserved-category candidates selected after relaxed standards must be counted against reserved vacancies.

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan issued an advertisement for appointment to the post of Principal for the years 2012–13 and 2013–14. Following the written examination and interview, the cut-off marks were 74.50% for the Unreserved (UR) category and 66.50% for the OBC category; the applicant secured 65.50% and was not included in the OBC select list

In an earlier proceeding, OA No. 69/2015, the applicant alleged improper award of interview marks and contended that Shri Ram Chandra Bhuria and Shri Suresh Kumar had been wrongly placed in the OBC category. He sought their adjustment against UR vacancies so that OBC vacancies would become available for his consideration

The Tribunal directed the respondents to treat his additional affidavit as a representation and decide it by a reasoned order. The respondents rejected the request through memorandum dated 09.09.2016, leading to the present OA seeking quashing of that memorandum and appointment against an OBC vacancy

Shri Bhuria had secured 75% aggregate marks but had received relaxation in the written-examination cut-off for being called to interview; Shri Suresh Kumar had not received such relaxation

1. Whether Shri Ram Chandra Bhuria, an OBC candidate who obtained 75% aggregate marks but had availed relaxation in the written-examination cut-off, was required to be adjusted against a UR vacancy rather than an OBC vacancy

2. Whether, upon such adjustment, the applicant was entitled to consideration or appointment against an OBC-category vacancy

3. Whether the principle in Jitendra Kumar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2010) 3 SCC 119, concerning adjustment of reserved-category candidates against open-category seats after availing relaxation, applied to the present case

The Tribunal applied the Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum dated 01.07.1998, under which SC/ST/OBC candidates selected on the same standards as general candidates are to be adjusted against unreserved vacancies, whereas candidates selected after application of a relaxed standard are to be counted against reserved vacancies

The Tribunal also considered Jitendra Kumar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2010) 3 SCC 119, but distinguished it on the basis that it concerned age relaxation, whereas the present case involved relaxation of the written-examination cut-off for eligibility to appear in the interview

The Tribunal found that Shri Bhuria had been permitted to participate in the interview only after receiving relaxation in the written-examination cut-off. Although his aggregate score after applying the 70:30 written-examination/interview weightage was 75%, his selection was not made on the same standard applicable to general candidates

Consequently, under the DoP&T OM dated 01.07.1998, he was required to be counted against the OBC vacancy and could not be shifted to the UR category. The Tribunal noted that Shri Suresh Kumar was not placed against an OBC vacancy because he had not received any relaxation in the prescribed cut-off

Since the applicant did not controvert the fact that Shri Bhuria had availed relaxation, the Tribunal held that the reliance on Jitendra Kumar Singh was misplaced and that the respondents’ classification of Shri Bhuria under the OBC category was consistent with the governing policy

The memorandum dated 09.09.2016 was upheld, the OA was dismissed, and there was no order as to costs