
Nagaraj vs The Commissioner, Department of Excise and others. Writ Petition 117767/2019 and 103279/2018 decided on 13 November 2010.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/349008/1/WP117767-19-13-11-2020.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 12. When any appointment is made by way of direct recruitment, either by way of competitive examination or selection, the list of candidates should be arranged in the order of merit and they should be selected in that order. It does not contemplate that the candidates belonging to the reserved category should be excluded from the order of merit. Thus, in case where a candidate belongs to the reserved category, performs so well that he finds a place in the general merit category, he has to be placed in the general merit category and another candidate has to be chosen as against the post reserved for that particular category.
13, 14 &15. The reservation is envisaged under the Constitution of India to eradicate the disadvantage suffered by candidates belonging to socially and educationally backward classes. It is permissible for the State, in view of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 38 of the Constitution of India to provide for reservation. The reservations are a mode to achieve equality of opportunity guaranteed under Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India and caste is one of the criteria to determine the social and educational backwardness in our country.The Philosophy is upliftment of that caste group, who are subjected to social discrimination, by providing them reservation. If a candidate amongst them who are so capable to compete with General Merit candidates, he should not be considered under the reserved category, but selected under General Merit category and the benefit of reservation should go to another candidate from the reserved category.
19. The appointment of respondent No.4 has to be considered as against the appointment made in the general merit category and the appointment of the petitioner has to be considered as against the reserved category for a Scheduled Tribe. The selection of respondent No.5 is illegal.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.