reserved candidates scoring above General cut-off must be considered in Open Category. – Upholds Rajasthan High Court decision protecting rights of meritorious reserved candidates. – Open Category is merit-based, not a quota for any class. – Candidates can’t be confined to reserved category if they score higher than General cut-off. – Dismisses “double benefit” claim; merit alone determines suitability for unreserved posts [1][2][6]. Want to know more about implications or related cases?

[05/01, 08:36] Sekarreporter: “Home
Other Legal News
Merit Cannot Be Compartmentalised: Supreme Court Backs Open Category Inclusion For Reserved Candidates
Merit Cannot Be Compartmentalised: Supreme Court Backs Open Category Inclusion For Reserved Candidates
BW Online Bureau Jan 04, 2026
A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih dismissed appeals filed by the Rajasthan High Court administration and its Registrar

The Supreme Court has affirmed a Rajasthan High Court decision that protects the rights of meritorious candidates from reserved categories in public recruitment. It held that candidates who score higher than the cut-off fixed for the General or Open category must be considered in the open category, even at the shortlisting stage. They cannot be confined to their respective reserved categories only because of their social classification.

A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih dismissed appeals filed by the Rajasthan High Court administration and its Registrar. The appeals challenged a Division Bench judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated September 18, 2023.








00:00 / 03:01


Copy video url
Play / Pause
Mute / Unmute
Report a problem
Language
Share
Vidverto Player




The dispute arose from a recruitment drive launched in August 2022 for 2,756 posts of Junior Judicial Assistant and Clerk Grade-II across courts in Rajasthan. The process involved a written examination of 300 marks and a subsequent typewriting test of 100 marks. Candidates clearing the written test were shortlisted for the next stage, limited to five times the number of vacancies, category-wise.

When results were declared in May 2023, an anomaly surfaced. The cut-off marks for several reserved categories, including SC, OBC, MBC and EWS, exceeded the General category cut-off. This led to the exclusion of some reserved category candidates who scored more than the General cut-off but less than the cut-off fixed for their own category.

Aggrieved candidates moved the Rajasthan High Court. They argued that the recruitment authority treated the open category as a closed compartment meant only for unreserved candidates. They claimed this violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

The High Court accepted this contention. It held that while category-wise shortlisting is permissible, candidates from reserved categories who secure higher marks than the General cut-off, without using any relaxation, must be included in the open category list at the shortlisting stage. It directed that the open list must first be prepared purely on merit. Reserved lists must follow, after excluding candidates already accommodated in the open category.

The Supreme Court rejected the claim that such inclusion grants a “double benefit” to reserved candidates. The Court noted that the General or Open category is not a quota for any class. It is a merit-based space open to all.

“Certainly, mere indication of one’s reserved category in the application form does not automatically qualify the candidate for appointment on a reserved vacant post but only enables him/her to stake a claim amongst all reserved candidates based on the inter se merit position. Equally, for a deserving reserved category candidate to be appointed on an unreserved vacant post, it is merit and merit alone that must determine suitability.”

The Court also rejected the plea of estoppel raised by the appellants. Justice Datta noted that candidates could not foresee a process where superior merit still leads to exclusion from open posts.

Relying on Indra Sawhney and R.K. Sabharwal, the Court reiterated that equality cannot be denied to a candidate who secures higher merit merely due to caste or community.

“If such a candidate…”
https://www.bwlegalworld.com/article/merit-cannot-be-compartmentalised-supreme-court-backs-open-category-inclusion-for-reserved-candidates-585910#:~:text=merit%20merely%20due,such%20a%20candidate%E2%80%A6
[05/01, 08:36] Meta AI: உச்ச நீதிமன்றம், இடஒதுக்கீட்டு பிரிவைச் சேர்ந்த வேட்பாளர்கள் பொது பிரிவுக்கான வெட்டு மதிப்பெண்ணை விட அதிக மதிப்பெண் பெற்றிருந்தால், அவர்களை பொது பிரிவில் சேர்க்க வேண்டும் என்று தீர்ப்பளித்துள்ளது. இது சமூக வகைப்பாட்டின் அடிப்படையில் அவர்களை அவர்களின் இடஒதுக்கீட்டு பிரிவில் மட்டும் வைத்திருக்க முடியாது என்பதை உறுதிப்படுத்துகிறது.

ராஜஸ்தான் உயர் நீதிமன்றத்தின் தீர்ப்பை உறுதிப்படுத்திய உச்ச நீதிமன்றம், பொது பிரிவு என்பது எந்தவொரு குறிப்பிட்ட வகுப்பிற்கும் ஒதுக்கப்பட்ட ஒரு ஒதுக்கீடு அல்ல, மாறாக தகுதியின் அடிப்படையில் அனைவருக்கும் திறந்திருக்கும் ஒரு இடம் என்று கூறியது.

இடஒதுக்கீட்டு பிரிவைச் சேர்ந்த வேட்பாளர்களுக்கு “இரட்டை பலன்” வழங்கப்படுவதாக கூறப்படும் கூற்றையும் நீதிமன்றம் நிராகரித்தது. ¹ ² ³

இந்த தீர்ப்பு குறித்து மேலும் தெரிந்து கொள்ள விரும்புகிறீர்களா? அல்லது இடஒதுக்கீட்டு கொள்கைகள் மற்றும் அவற்றின் செயல்பாடு குறித்து அறிய விரும்புகிறீர்களா?
[05/01, 08:37] Meta AI: ✅ Supreme Court: Merit can’t be compartmentalised; reserved candidates scoring above General cut-off must be considered in Open Category.
– Upholds Rajasthan High Court decision protecting rights of meritorious reserved candidates.
– Open Category is merit-based, not a quota for any class.
– Candidates can’t be confined to reserved category if they score higher than General cut-off.
– Dismisses “double benefit” claim; merit alone determines suitability for unreserved posts [1][2][6].

Want to know more about implications or related cases?