The Supreme Court of India ruled that SC, ST and OBC candidates scoring above the general category cut-off must be adjusted against unreserved seats. The Court clarified that unreserved seats are an open merit pool, not a quota meant only for general category candidates.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has clearly stated that candidates belonging to reserved categories such as SC, ST and OBC, who score more marks than the general category cut-off, must be counted against unreserved seats and not forced into their reserved quota.
Reaffirming a long-standing legal position, a Bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Satisl Chandra Sharma said,
“It is now a setiled proposition of law that a candidate belonging to reserve category (SC, ST and OBC) who haa acored marks higher than the cut off marks for the Genera Category is to be treated as having qualified against an open or unreserved vacant post.”
The Supreme Court made these observations while setting aside a 2020 judgment of the Kerala High Court, which had earlier directed the Airports Authority of India (AAI) to appoint an unreserved category candidate by excluding meritorious reserved category (MRC) candidates from the general list.
ALSO READ: Reserved Candidates Cannot Later Claim General Seats If Rules Bar It: Supreme Court
Justice Sharma, who authored the judgment, explained that the “unreserved” category should not be misunderstood as a “quota” meant only for general category candidates. He clarified that it is an “open” category where selection is based purely on merit, irrespective of caste or community.
The Court further held that this principle, described as “Merit Induced Shift”, flows directly from Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before law and equality of opportunity in public employment.
The Bench said that when a reserved category candidate performs better than general category candidates without taking any special benefits or “oncessions” such as age relaxation or fee relaxation, such a candidate must be treated as an open category candidate. This ensures that merit is respected and not penalised.
The judgment also explained that once such a candidate is adjusted in the unreserved category, the reserved seats remain available for the next most deserving candidates within that specific reserved category. This protects both merit and the purpose of reservation.
The case arose from a 2013 recruitment process conducted by the AAI for 245 posts of Junior Assistant (Fire Service). During the selection, AAI filled 122 unreserved posts by including candidates from the general category as well as meritorious candidates from OBC, SC and ST categories.
Sham Krishna G, an unreserved category candidate who was placed at Serial No. 10 on the waiting list, challenged this method.
He argued that reserved category candidates should be confined only to their respective quotas. According to him, this would have resulted in his appointment to a permanent post.
Accepting his plea, the Kerala High Court had earlier held that the AAI’s selection process was flawed and directed that Sham Krishna G be appointed.
However, the Supreme Court has now overturned that decision, restoring the long-established rule that merit cannot be ignored simply because a candidate belongs to a reserved category.
By doing so, the apex court has once again reinforced that equality under the Constitution means fair competition on merit, while also ensuring that reservation benefits reach those who genuinely need them.
Read More Reports On General Seats
