Reserved Category Candidates utilizing age relaxation cannot migrate to General Category merit seats.

The applicant, an MBC candidate with M.A. and M.L.I.S. degrees, applied for the post of Fireman following a 2007 notification

Although the written exam was held in 2012, 23 vacancies remained unfilled due to non-joining or resignations

In 2016, the respondents published an additional select list to fill these vacancies

The applicant secured 56 marks but was not selected, while candidates with lower marks (Respondents 4 to 11) were appointed under UR and OBC categories

The applicant challenged the list, alleging that MBC candidates should have been considered for UR/OBC slots based on merit and that age relaxation rules were misapplied

The respondents contended the applicant was overaged (25 years) at the time of application and only eligible via MBC relaxation, and that available MBC slots were filled by Meritorious Sports Persons (MSP) under horizontal reservation

1. Whether the selection of Respondents 4 to 11 in the additional select list was arbitrary and illegal due to the non-selection of a higher-scoring MBC candidate

2. Whether a candidate who avails age relaxation as a reserved category candidate can subsequently claim a seat in the general/unreserved category based on merit

The Tribunal applied the principles of horizontal and vertical reservation as stipulated in the Recruitment Rules for the post of Fireman

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepa E.V. vs. Union of India Others (2017) 12 SCC 80, which establishes that a reserved category candidate who avails of relaxations (such as age relaxation) cannot later seek migration to the unreserved/general category based on merit

The principle of horizontal reservation, where special categories (like Meritorious Sports Persons) consume slots within their respective vertical categories (like MBC)

The Court found that as of the crucial date (01.09.2007), the applicant was 25 years old, exceeding the general upper age limit of 24 years

By applying as an MBC candidate to gain a 3-year age relaxation, the applicant restricted his eligibility to the reserved category

Under the rule established in Deepa E.V., he could not claim a seat in the UR category despite having higher marks than UR/OBC candidates because he had already availed himself of a category-specific benefit (age relaxation) to become eligible

Furthermore, regarding the MBC vacancies, the Court noted that the two available slots were rightfully filled by MBC candidates under the Meritorious Sports Person (MSP) quota through horizontal reservation

The Court concluded that the respondents acted in conformity with the recruitment notification and governing rules, and found no evidence of arbitrariness

It held that the applicant was not entitled to appointment because his eligibility was predicated on age relaxation, which barred him from competing for Unreserved seats, and the specific MBC slots were legally occupied by MSP candidates

No order as to costs was made