Candidate Who Availed OBC Quota To Qualify First Stage Of Exam Cannot Later Shift To Unreserved Category: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has said that a candidate who avails reservation benefits under OBC category to qualify for first phase of examination, cannot subsequently seek migration to unreserved category at the second stage of exam after they are unable to qualify the second stage as an OBC candidate.
In doing so the court dismissed the plea of a woman who after qualifying the first stage of 2023 Police Constable Recruitment Test under OBC category, had sought migration to unreserved category in the second stage after she had failed to meet the cut off of the OBC category.
The bench of Justice Deepak Khot observed;
"As per Rule, though the petitioner has not secured more marks than the cut off marks of unreserved category for the first phase, has been given chance to appear in the second Physical Proficiency Test by granting benefit of the OBC reserved category in which the cut of marks were less than the marks obtained by the petitioner then there is no question of taking into consideration the total marks for the selection by applying the principle of adjusting the reserved category candidate against the unreserved category candidate, who has secured more marks than the cut of marks of the unreserved category".
The bench further observed;
"Thus, if the principle emerges from the above cited cases is applied in the present case then the reservation of OBC had not been applied in the case of the petitioner and she would have not been selected for the second phase and the candidature of the petitioner would have been rejected at the first phase itself, but, as the petitioner has been given the benefit of reservation of OBC, the petitioner could reach in the second phase. Therefore, the marks, which the petitioner has obtained in total, cannot be made criteria once the petitioner has been given the benefit of the reservation at the first stage".
The petitioner, belonging to the Other Backwards Class or the Economically Weaker Sections, filed a writ petition seeking directions against the MP Employee Selection Board (respondent no 2) to quash the result of the petitioner to the extent of being not qualified.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that she submitted candidature for the Police Constable Recruitment Test for 2023 issued by the Selection Board under the Other Backwards Class Category.
The petitioner in the first phase of examination obtained 77.68 marks and qualified for the second phase, the Physical Proficiency Test. In the second exam, she obtained 67 marks.
The final cut off marks for the OBC (Female) category were 151.07, which is higher than the marks obtained by the petitioner, making her ineligible for selection under the OBC category. However, the final cut-off marks for the unreserved (female) category stood at 143.55, which is lower than the marks secured by the petitioner and she claimed that she should have been considered for selection under the unreserved category on the basis of her higher merit position.
The counsel argued that the cut-off marks for the unreserved category were 143.53, but the Board rejected her candidature and did not appoint the petitioners, although she obtained more marks than the cut-off which was
It was submitted that as per Clause 15(iv) of the Rule Book, the petitioner should be treated under the unreserved category and declared qualified for the post since she has obtained more marks than the cut off marks prescribed for the unreserved category.
The counsel for the respondents argued that the petitioner belonged to the OBC category and had applied under the same. The petitioner secured 77.68 marks in the written Examination and thereby was qualified under the first phase under the OBC category, whereas the cut-off for the unreserved category was 79.72.
The counsel asserted that since the petitioner was considered and qualified under the OBC category in the first phase of selection, she cannot claim consideration under the unreserved category in the second phase.
The bench noted that the petitioner received the benefit of reservation in the first phase, and only because of the said benefit, the petitioner succeeded to the second phase of examination.
Referring to the case of Saurav Yadav v State of UP [AIR 2021 SC 233], the bench observed that in the present case, the petitioner in the final round secured more marks than the cut-off marks of the unreserved category. However, she cannot avail the benefit of her marks because her selection was made following Clause 11 of the Rulebook, which mandates that the candidate must first clear the first test and then appear in the second test.
Further, the bench noted that although the petitioner had not secured more marks than the cut-off marks of the unreserved category in the first phase. Therefore, the eligibility of the petitioner to appear in the second round was only because she was given a benefit under the OBC reserved category.
The bench held that the petitioner cannot be permitted to migrate to the unreserved category seat, considering she had benefited from the reservation given to her in the first phase of examination.
Thus, the bench dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Sana Khan v State of Madhya Pradesh [WP-12783-2025]
For Petitioner: Advocate Dinesh Singh Chauhan
For Respondent: Government Advocate Anshuman Swamy
For MP Employee Selection Board: Advocate Siddhartha Sharma