Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.61 seconds)Rajesh Kumar Daria vs Rajasthan Public Service Commission & ... on 18 July, 2007
25. This is the general purport of Rajesh
Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission
and Ors. [(2007) 8 SCC 785] as is revealed from the
following extract from Paragraph 9:
R. K. Sabharwal And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 10 February, 1995
24. More clarity is available from the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied on by
the AAI itself. R.K.Sabharwal and Ors. v. State
of Punjab and Ors. [(1995) 2 SCC 745] declared that
W.A No.1581 of 2018
28
"When a percentage of reservation is fixed in respect of a
particular cadre and the roster indicates the reserve
points, it has to be taken that the posts shown at the
reserve points are to be filled from amongst the members of
reserve categories and the candidates belonging to the
general category are not entitled to be considered for the
reserved posts. On the other hand the reserve category
candidates can compete for the non-reserve posts and in the
event of their appointment to the said posts their number
cannot be added and taken into consideration for working
out the percentage of reservation." (sic-para 4)
The mandate is only to permit the reserved
categories to compete for the non-reserved UR
vacancies and not to count such reserved candidates
appointed to open competition (UR) vacancies for
satisfying the quota provided to that community.
Niravkumar Dilipbhai Makwana vs Gujrat Public Service Commission And ... on 4 July, 2019
16. We agree with the submission that the
W.A No.1581 of 2018
19
candidates who applied under the reserved category
availing of any benefit of relaxation of standards
or even age, available to their community, can be
appointed only to the reserved vacancies, as held
in Niravkumar Dilipbhai Makwana Vs. Gujarat P.S.C
(2019) 7 SCC 383. But there can be no rule that a
meritorious reserved candidate who, on the basis of
his merit is at the roster point reserved for his
community should be passed over to accommodate
another reserved candidate, lower down in the list
who has availed of a relaxation. Then the principle
of primacy to merit stands compromised.
Union Of India And Ors. Etc vs Virpal Singh Chauhan Etc on 10 October, 1995
745), Union of India v. Virpal Singh
Chauhan(1995(6) SCC 684) and Ritesh R. Sah
v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul(1996(3) SCC 253).) ..."
Shri Ritesh R. Sah vs Dr. Y.L. Yamul & Ors on 15 February, 1996
745), Union of India v. Virpal Singh
Chauhan(1995(6) SCC 684) and Ritesh R. Sah
v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul(1996(3) SCC 253).) ..."
1