Reserved category candidates selected on merit without relaxation must be adjusted against unreserved vacancies.

The applicant, a Loco Pilot (Passenger) belonging to the ST category, applied for the post of Assistant Mechanical Engineer (AME)/Assistant Workshop Manager (AWM) under the 30% Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) quota.

A notification was issued on 17.08.2020 for two vacancies: one Unreserved (UR) and one Reserved (ST).

Following the examination process, a selection panel was issued on 12.04.2021, placing Shri Dharamveer C. Meena (ST) against the ST vacancy and Shri Ajit Kumar (General) against the UR vacancy.

The results revealed that Dharamveer C. Meena secured 108.5 marks (the highest overall), Ajit Kumar secured 104 marks, and the applicant secured 95 marks.

The applicant contended that since Dharamveer C. Meena was the topper on "own merit," he should have been adjusted against the UR vacancy, thereby leaving the ST vacancy for the applicant as the next eligible ST candidate.

The respondents maintained that the selection followed extant Railway Board policies (RBE No. 117/2016 and RBE No. 91/2018).

1. Whether a reserved category candidate who secures the highest marks in a selection process without any relaxation must be adjusted against the Unreserved (UR) vacancy on "own merit" rather than the reserved quota.

2. Whether the failure of the respondents to treat the topper as a UR candidate caused the illegal exclusion of the applicant from the ST-reserved vacancy.

The court primarily applied the principle of "own merit" as established in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, which mandates that reserved category members selected on their own merit in open competition shall not be counted against the reserved quota.

It relied on DoP&T OM No. 360111/98-Estt.(Res) dated 01.07.1998, which clarifies that SC/ST candidates selected on the same standard as general candidates must be adjusted against unreserved vacancies.

The Tribunal also cited Railway Board Circular RBE No. 91/2018 and the Supreme Court’s interim directions in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, which permit promotions on merit during the pendency of litigation.

Furthermore, it applied the Railway Board’s own letter No. 2018-E(SCT)1/25/9 dated 22.06.2022, which reiterates that persons appointed on merit should occupy unreserved points.

The Tribunal observed that Dharamveer C. Meena secured 108.5 marks, the highest among all ten candidates, including general category participants.

Under the "own merit" doctrine, a reserved category candidate who qualifies without any relaxed standards (such as age, experience, or lower qualifying marks) must be treated as a general/open candidate.

The respondents failed to produce any evidence that Dharamveer C. Meena had availed himself of any relaxation to qualify for the exam.

The Tribunal found the respondents' actions contradictory: while their written reply admitted that reserved candidates reaching the merit of unreserved posts should be adjusted against UR vacancies, their actual selection panel did the opposite.

By erroneously adjusting the topper against the ST vacancy, the respondents deprived the applicant, who was the next ST candidate in line, of the reserved post.

The Tribunal concluded that this was a violation of established service jurisprudence and the Ministry of Railway's own guidelines.

It held that Dharamveer C. Meena, having secured the highest marks without relaxation, must be adjusted against the UR vacancy.

The Tribunal directed the respondents to re-issue a fresh selection panel within 90 days, treating Dharamveer C. Meena as a UR candidate and considering the applicant for the ST-reserved vacancy as per the merit list and the directions in RBE No. 91/2018 and relevant DoP&T OMs.

All pending MAs were disposed of with no order as to costs.