Horizontally Reserved PwD Post In Unreserved Category Open To SC/ST/OBC Candidates With Disabilities : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 7) observed that when a horizontal reservation is applied to an unreserved seat, then it is open to all candidates possessing that horizontal attribute to fight for the unreserved seat, regardless of whether they belong to SC, ST, OBC, or the general category.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh heard the case where one post of Junior Civil Engineer in West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. was notified under UR (PWD-LV), an unreserved post horizontally reserved for Persons with Disabilities (Low Vision/Blindness). The Respondent No.3, belonging to an OBC-A (Most Backward) with PWD-LV attributes, was denied selection by the Calcutta High Court for the post despite scoring more marks than the UR (PWD-LV) candidate.

The High Court had held that since a UR-PWD candidate was available, the post must be filled by him, irrespective of comparative merit.

Setting aside the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Justice N Kotiswar Singh observed that the UR (PWD-LV) was meant for all candidates of all vertical social categories, whether SC, ST or OBC, provided such candidates are also Persons with Disabilities.

“…if the Unreserved/Open post is meant for the special category of Persons with Disabilities, it means that the said post will be open to all candidates of all vertical social categories, whether SC, ST or OBC, provided such candidates are also Persons with Disabilities. Thus, all candidates, whether SC, ST or OBC, but who are Persons with Disabilities, are equally entitled to compete for the post meant for Persons with Disabilities falling under the Unreserved category, the rationale being that all those who are similarly situated must be treated equally.”, the court said.

The bench underscored that merit is the sole governing criterion for appointments under the Unreserved category. It held that denying a more meritorious candidate solely because he belongs to a reserved category would be arbitrary and violative of equality.

Since the OBC-A/PWD candidate had secured higher marks, he was rightly appointed against the UR (PWD-LV) post.

“…even though qualified PWD-LV candidates under the Unreserved category may be available, if there is a PWD-LV candidate belonging to other social reserved category available who is better in merit than the Unreserved PWD-LV candidate available, the said post is to be filled up by the more meritorious reserved PWD-LV candidate by ignoring the claim of the less meritorious Unreserved candidate by virtue of merit.”, the court observed.

Non-Availability Clause Clarified

The recruitment notification stated that if no UR-PWD candidate was available, the vacancy could be filled by candidates from other categories.

The Court clarified that this clause does not mean that the presence of any UR candidate, however less meritorious, automatically excludes more meritorious candidates from reserved categories. “Instead, such clauses are fallback provisions and cannot override the fundamental principle of merit in open category appointments.

“…this horizontally reserved post of PWD-LV falling under the Unreserved category can be filled by any PWD-LV candidate belonging to any social reserved category, as this post of PWD-LV under the Unreserved category is also open to all PWD-LV candidates belonging to any social reserved category.”, the court observed.

“The only condition attached to this Unreserved/Open category in the present case is that it is meant only for candidates belonging to the horizontal PWD-LV category, i.e., it is specially reserved for persons who are categorised as PWD-LV. The Unreserved post/vacancy for PWD-LV is available and open to all, irrespective of the social category they may belong to, provided they also belong to the same special category of PWD-LV. As the said post falls under the Unreserved category, it is to be filled up purely on merit. Merit is the co-attendant and inseparable attribute of appointment to any post under the “Unreserved” category. As a consequence, every person belonging to any social reserved category, can compete with others, including those under the “Unreserved” category and can be appointed against such Unreserved post, so long as they belong to the special PWD-LV category, as it is the condition that the post under the Unreserved category is reserved for the horizontal category of PWDLV.”, the court added.

Since the Respondent no.3 had not availed any relaxation (as per Union of India vs. Sajib Roy) for claiming a UR post, he couldn't be denied relief, the Court held.

Thus, the court confirmed the selection of Respondent No.3 to the UR (PWD-LV) post.

Headnote

Service Law – Reservation – Horizontal Reservation – Mobility from Reserved to Unreserved (Open) Category –The Supreme Court set aside the Calcutta High Court Division Bench judgment which held that an Unreserved PWD vacancy must be filled by an Unreserved candidate if available, regardless of more meritorious PWD candidates from reserved social categories - Held, the "Unreserved" or "Open" category does not constitute a separate communal or social category - It represents an open pool available to all candidates irrespective of their social category (SC/ST/OBC), provided they satisfy the specific criteria of the horizontal reservation (e.g., PWD-LV) - Reaffirmed that meritorious candidates belonging to reserved social categories (SC/ST/OBC) who also fall under a horizontal reservation category (like PWD) are entitled to be appointed against the Unreserved horizontal quota based on their merit - A less meritorious candidate from the Unreserved category cannot "steal a march" over a more meritorious reserved category candidate for an Unreserved post.

Pre-condition for Migration – Held that a reserved category candidate seeking appointment against an Unreserved vacancy must not have availed themselves of any relaxation in eligibility criteria (such as age or experience) meant specifically for the reserved category - Merit must be the sole decisive factor for Unreserved posts.

Interpretation of Recruitment Notification – A clause stating that "in case of non availability of qualified UR (PWD-LV) candidate, the vacancy will be filled by PWD candidates of other categories" does not bar more meritorious PWD candidates from social reserved categories from competing for the UR post in the first instance - Such clauses must be read in consonance with the constitutional principles of equality under Articles 14 and 16. [Relied on Saurav Yadav v. State of U.P. (2021) 4 SCC 542; Indra Sawhney v. Union of India 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217; Deepa E.V. v. Union of India (2017) 12 SCC 680; Paras 28-47]

Cause Title: THE WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO.LTD & ORS. VERSUS DIPENDU BISWAS & ORS.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 336

Click here to download judgment

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Shraddha Chirania, Adv. Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Samarendra Nath Biswas, Adv. Mr. Anindo Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Shraddha Chirania, Adv. Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR Mr. Abhijeet Pandey, Adv. Mr. Soumya Dutta, AOR