Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(c) for direction to make appointments of 65 SEBC female candidates and total 195 SEBC candidates on the post in question, in addition to the meritorious SEBC candidates finding place on their own merit in the total list of 376 vacancies notified for open category.

3. Stating the relevant facts, the Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) issued Advertisement No.51/2014-15 dated 12th March, 2015 to undertake the process to fill up posts of Deputy Section Officer/Deputy Mamlatdar, Class-III. Total 733 vacancies were notified, out of which 376 were for General, 55 for Scheduled Caste, 107 for Scheduled Tribe and 195 were for the category Socially & Educationally Backward Class (SEBC). As per the Notification dated 09th April, 1997, 33% statutory reservation for women is required to be provided for in each category. Accordingly, in the unreserved category and SC and ST category, vacancies for women in reservation were 125, 18 and 34 respectively. In C/LPA/644/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 04/02/2022 the SEBC category, 65 posts were required to be filled in by SEBC female candidates.

4. On behalf of the appellant-GPSC as well as State Government, which also plunged into the fray feeling aggrieved to assail the impugned order, the very submissions which were advanced before learned Single Judge to contest the petition, were canvassed. The contentions raised in the affidavit-in-reply were re-raised. Appellant-GPSC inter alia contended that upon declaration of the result of the main examination the qualifying standard for Female candidate in SEBC (Female) category whose date of birth fell upto 16th June, 1986, was 148 marks. It was the case of the authorities thereafter that the qualifying standard to be applied was 149 marks for the candidates having date of birth subsequent to 16th June, 1986 and since the petitioner had secured 148 marks and her date of birth was 06th October, 1992, she was not entitled to be considered for appointment. It was sought to be denied that respondents had filled up 11 SEBC (Female) vacancies from amongst the SEBC (Male) candidates.

(c) GPSC did not include 98 candidates of SEBC category and minimum 33 candidates of SEBC category while preparing waiting list. According to submission, the GPSC was required to prepare the waiting list of the half number of notified vacancies category-wise;

4.3.3 Learned Single Judge then proceeded to observe that keeping in view the principles enunciated in Rajesh Kumar Daria (supra), the GPSC could not have counted 14 female candidates appointed on open category who occupied the reserved post in the SEBC (Female) category, due to which the shortfall in that category of SEBC (Female) resulted, and that requisite number of women should have been taken by deleting the corresponding number of candidates with a view to fulfill the criteria of women's reservation. It may be added here that in order to complete the quota of appointment in the SEBC (Female) category also, it was necessary to post available candidate on merit from SEBC (Female). It was already-factually-falsified stand of the GPSC that there was no other female candidate available in the waiting list.