A Division Bench of Chief Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Partha Sarthy dismissed an appeal filed by candidates seeking appointment as Trade Instructor (Fitter) under Advertisement No. 10 of 2023, who had challenged their exclusion from the selection process after being considered under the EBC category.

The appellants had applied for the posts under the Scheduled Caste category, claiming reservation benefits on the basis of their membership of the Tanti-Tantwa community. According to the appellants, they had submitted caste certificates, appeared in the examination, been declared successful and were subsequently called for document verification.

However, during the recruitment process, the Supreme Court's judgment in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar, Patna v. State of Bihar & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 18802 of 2017, became relevant to their eligibility for reservation benefits. In that case, the Supreme Court had set aside the Bihar Government's resolution dated July 1, 2015, through which reservation benefits under the Scheduled Caste quota had been extended to members of the Tanti-Tantwa community.

The Supreme Court had directed that SC-reserved posts extended to members of the community appointed after the 2015 resolution be returned to the Scheduled Caste quota. It further directed that members of the community who had received such benefits could be accommodated under their original category of Extremely Backward Classes, with the State required to take appropriate measures.

In compliance with the judgment, the Bihar Government issued a Gazette notification dated August 12, 2024. The Labour Resources Department subsequently directed the Bihar Technical Service Commission (BTSC), through letters dated September 4 and 19, 2024, to rectify the merit list. The Commission also issued a communication dated October 15, 2024, requiring candidates to submit valid caste certificates for consideration of their reservation claims.

Consequently, the appellants were considered under the EBC category instead of the SC category. However, they did not secure the cut-off marks applicable to EBC candidates and were therefore not selected. Challenging this decision, the appellants argued that their reservation category ought to be determined according to the position prevailing when the advertisement was issued or applications were submitted. They contended that subsequent changes in categorisation should not apply retrospectively to an ongoing recruitment process.

The Commission maintained that the reclassification was necessary to comply with the Supreme Court's judgment. Since the recruitment process had not been finalised, the appellants were required to be considered under their original EBC category. The appellants initially challenged the Commission's resolution dated October 30, 2024, before the Single Judge, who dismissed their writ petition on August 11, 2025. They subsequently preferred an intra-court appeal.

Rejecting the appellants' arguments, the Division Bench held that the Supreme Court's judgment required the Tanti-Tantwa community to be treated under the EBC category. The Court observed:

“…So, it follows that the effect of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar, Patna (supra) is that 'Tanti-Tantwa' caste be treated as an Extremely Backward Class category. The appellants were considered, belonging to Extremely Backward Classes Category and their candidature was considered on the basis of the said caste.”

The Bench noted the Commission's position that none of the appellants had secured the qualifying cut-off marks applicable to EBC candidates. It also agreed with the Single Judge's conclusion that the Supreme Court's ruling governed the recruitment under Advertisement No. 10 of 2023, notwithstanding that the recruitment process had commenced earlier. Upholding the Single Judge's decision, the Court observed:

“We are of the view that the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the petition as the issue which fell for consideration for treating the appellants belonging to Extremely Backward Class was pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar, Patna (supra). We hold that the learned Single Judge is justified in dismissing the writ petition in the manner, the learned Single Judge has held in paragraph Nos. 21 to 26 which we have reproduced above.”

Accordingly, the High Court upheld the decision to consider the appellants under the EBC category and declined to interfere with the dismissal of their writ petition.

Appearance:

For the Appellants: Mr. Ram Shankar Das, Advocate

For the State: Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, AAG-1; Mr. Sarveshwar Tiwari, AC to AAG-1

For BTSC: Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate; Ms. Jyoti, Advocate