Pages

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Second coaching class for IP Examination at Madurai, (Tamilnadu)

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017

2017 – SECOND COACHING CLASS FOR IPO EXAMINATION AT MADURAI (TAMILNADU CIRCLE) FOR EIGHT DAYS FROM 04.06.2017 (SUNDAY) TO 11.06.2017 (SUNDAY) FOR ALL SUBJECTS


Shri. M.Bakthavatchalam. M.A. B.L., Senior Supdt. of Post Offices (Retired) and  Shri. P.Karunanithy, Supdt. of Pos (Retired) will conduct Coaching class for eight days for ensuing IPO examination at Madurai as detailed below:

Venue
Tamilnadu Government Employees Association building, No. 11, Mela Perumal Maistry veethi, near Chennai Silks and opposite  to Park Plaza Hotel, opposite Railway station , Madurai 625 001
                              Eight  days classes
04.06.2017    (Sunday) to 11.06.2017 – (Sunday)

First session is going on at Madurai. Many candidates from Maharastra, Kerala, Andra Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka and Tamilnadu are attending the class. RMS Candidates are also attending the coaching class.

1. Coaching classes will be conducted from 0930 hours to 1730 hours.

2. Special classes will be conducted for RMS Candidates in the morning 0830 hours to 930 hours regarding postal side basic matters.

3. Study materials can be obtained in the coaching class.

4. Fees: Rs. 500/- (Five hundred only)  per day.

5. Coaching classes are conducted in English only. IPO candidates from neighbouring Circles may also participate.

5. Male and female officers may stay in  Hotel Grands Central, No. 82, Mela Perumal Maistry Veethi, Near Chennai Silks, opposite to  Railway Station Madurai 625 001. (Contact number: 0452 2343940 and Mobile No. 90431 33312). Concessional rate for postal staff Rent for Double Bedroom per day is Rs. 600/-. There is no separate single room. We have to book only double bedroom This lodge is very nearer to our coaching class.



6. Another lodge is available for male candidates as detailed below:
        LODGE SELECTION, No. 70, Town Hall Road, opposite to  Railway Station Madurai 625 001.                                                                
(Contact number: 0452 2342625 and 0452 4377087).

Rent for Single Bedroom per day is Rs. 320/-.
Rent for Double Bedroom per day is Rs. 420/-.
Rent for Triple  Bedroom per day is Rs. 520/-. This lodge is also very nearer to our coaching class.

7. Please bring the following books which are under the serial numbers of my list of books for IPO Examination.
        Sl No. 1,4,5,6,10, 11,14, 14-A,17,18,19,21 and 22.

For further details,  please contact
  1. Shri. P.Karunanithy,B.Sc., Retired SPOs : Cell number : 094433 29681 and
  2. Shri. M.Bakthavatsalam. M.A. B.L., Retired SSPOs Cell number: 075984 81056


Welcome to all.

Standard Operating Procedure and other material on Postman Mobile Application

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017


Click below link to download the materials on PMA Application India Post
Click Here to view the SOP and other material on Postman Mobile Application

Postman Mobile Application Bridge Version 1.0.0.5

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017


Click below link to Download Postman Bridge Version

Addendum SB order No.06/2016 - Change of Procedure on issue of KVPs & NSCs from 01.07.2016.

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017


To view please Click Here.

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Monday, May 8, 2017

Supply of POS (Swipe Machines) to all HOs in India

Written By Admin on May 5, 2017 | May 05, 2017




Click below to download the detailed report


Click Here to view the list of Head Offices to which SBI POS machines are being supplied for use in MPCM counter of Head Post Offices for booking of registers/speed post articles.

Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act , 2017 - Clarifications : Ministry of Labour & Employment

Written By Admin on May 7, 2017 | May 07, 2017

The Maternity Benefit ( Amendment ) Act , 2017 - Clarifications : Ministry of Labour & Employment.

The Act is applicable to all Women who are employed in any capacity directly or through any agency i.e either on Contractual or as Consultant.


Fillable Income Tax Form 60 / 61 in PDF - Download

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017

In case a person who enters into any of the aforesaid transactions does not have a PAN Card, He shall file a declaration in Form 60/Form 61

Form 60

Required to be filed in cases where a person enters into any of the transactions mentioned above but does not have a PAN card.

Form 61

Required to be furnished in case a person who has agricultural income and is not in receipt of any other income chargeable to income tax.

DOP launch Postman Application for delivery

Written By Admin on May 8, 2017 | May 08, 2017



Major facility is below-

1. It's compulsory for postman to carry Mobile in field / door step of the customer.

2. All type articles will be delivered by the Postman through postman Application.

3. Customer signature and thumb impression will take on mobile devices using Postman Application.

.4. After delivery of articles data uploaded on website at the same time/ immediately.

5. In morning article data collect through data cable from computer and same give return in evening

6. Mobile should be handed over to Treasurer in Treasury in evening

7. Games, other unauthorized applications and data's are prohibited.

8. At initial Stage Postman delivered article in both delivery slip and Mobile application, they will move only with application in later date if they specialist in Postman Mobile Application 

Sunday, May 7, 2017

FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN ARMY POSTAL SERVICE FOR GROUP ‘A’ & ‘B’ OFFICERS WHO ARE ON DEPUTATION TO APS

To view, please CLICK  HERE.

Think twice before becoming Administrator of a group on WhatsApp




Selection of Debit Card Vendor for India Post Payments Bank Limited

To view details, please CLICK HERE. 

Commemorative Stamp on The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) – 5th May 2017.

Telecom Regulatory authority of India (TRAI) was established on 20th February 1997 by an Act of Parliament to regulate telecom services, including fixation/revision of tariffs for telecom services which were earlier vested in the Central Government. TRAI's mission is to create and nurture conditions for growth of telecommunications in the country in a manner and at a pace which will enable India to play a leading role in emerging global information society. One of the main objectives of TRAI is to provide a fair and transparent policy environment which promotes a level playing field and facilitates fair competition. In pursuance of above objective TRAI has issued from time to time a large number of regulations, orders and directives to deal with issues coming before it and provided the required direction to the evolution of Indian telecom market from a Government owned monopoly to a multi operator multi service open competitive market.

TRAI has contributed to growth of Telecom & Broadcasting while ensuring consumer protection and fair play in the sectors. On the occasion of its completion of 20 glorious years two-day Seminar on 'Digital Broadcasting in India: Way Forward' was organized by TRAI.

The Minister of State for Communications (Independent Charge) and Railways, 
Shri Manoj Sinha released a Commemorative Stamp on The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) in presence of Minister of State for Information & Broadcasting, Col. Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore, The Chairman, TRAI, Shri R.S. Sharma, Secretary, Department of Posts & Chairperson, Postal Services Board, Shri Ananta Narayan Nanda at the closing ceremony of the two-day Seminar on Digital Broadcasting in India – Way forward in New Delhi on 5th May 2017.





Commemorative Stamp on Saint Ramanujacharya – 1st May 2017.

Ramanuja (Ramanujacharya) was a Hindu theologian, philosopher, and one of the most important exponents of the Sri Vaishnavism tradition within Hinduism. He was born in the year 1017 A.D., in the village of Perumbudur, about twenty-five miles west of Madras (Chennai). His father was Kesava Somayaji and his mother was Kantimathi, a very pious and virtuous lady. Ramanuja's Tamil name was Ilaya Perumal. Quite early in life, Ramanuja lost his father. Then he came to Kancheepuram to prosecute his study of the Vedas under one Yadavaprakasha, a teacher of Advaita philosophy. Ramanuja's guru was Yadava Prakasa, a scholar who was a part of the more ancient Advaita Vedanta monastic tradition. Yadava Prakasha's interpretations of Vedic texts were not quite up to his satisfaction.

Ramanuja is famous as the chief proponent of Vishishtadvaita subschool of Vedanta and his disciples were likely authors of texts such as the Shatyayaniya Upanishad. Ramanuja himself wrote influential texts, such as bhasya on the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita, all in Sanskrit. His philosophical foundations for devotionalism were influential to the Bhakti movement. When caste distinction and hierarchy had been recognized as integral to society and religion and everyone had accepted her place as high and low in the hierarchy, Saint Shri Ramanujacharya rebelled against it - In his personal life and religious teachings.

A Commemorative Stamp was released on the occasion of the one thousandth birth anniversary of the great social reformer and Saint Shri Ramanujacharya by Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi in New Delhi on 1st May, 2017. The Governor of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, Shri E.S.L. Narasimhan, the Union Minister for Urban Development, Housing & Urban Poverty Alleviation and Information & Broadcasting, Shri M. Venkaiah Naidu, the Union Minister for Chemicals & Fertilizers and Parliamentary Affairs, Shri Ananth Kumar, the Minister of State for Communications and Railways, Shri Manoj Sinha, the Minister of State for Commerce & Industry, Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman and the Minister of State for Road Transport & Highways and Shipping, Shri P. Radhakrishnan were present on the occasion.




Some Departmental Orders

Cabinet approves modifications in the 7th CPC recommendations on pay and pensionary benefits

Press Information Bureau
Gover
nment of India
Cabinet
 03-May-2017 20:27 IST
Cabinet approves modifications in the 7th CPC recommendations on pay and pensionary benefits

The Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved important proposals relating to modifications in the 7th CPC (Central Pay Commission) recommendations on pay and pensionary benefits in the course of their implementation. Earlier, in June, 2016, the Cabinet had approved implementation of the recommendations with an additional financial outgo of Rs 84,933 crore for 2016-17 (including arrears for 2 months of 2015-16).

The benefit of the proposed modifications will be available with effect from 1st January, 2016, i.e., the date of implementation of 7th CPC recommendations. With the increase approved by the Cabinet, the annual pension bill alone of the Central Government is likely to be Rs.1,76,071 crore.  Some of the important decisions of the Cabinet are mentioned below:

1.  Revision of pension of pre – 2016 pensioners and family pensioners

The Cabinet approved modifications in the recommendations of the 7th CPC relating to the method of revision of pension of pre-2016 pensioners and family pensioners based on suggestions made by the Committee chaired by Secretary (Pensions) constituted with the approval of the Cabinet.  The modified formulation of pension revision approved by the Cabinet will entail an additional benefit to the pensioners and an additional expenditure of approximately Rs.5031 crore for 2016-17 over and above the expenditure already incurred in revision of pension as per the second formulation based on fitment factor.  It will benefit over 55 lakh pre-2016 civil and defence pensioners and family pensioners.

While approving the implementation of the 7th CPC recommendations on 29th June, 2016, the Cabinet had approved the changed method of pension revision recommended by the 7th CPC for pre-2016 pensioners, comprising of two alternative formulations, subject to the feasibility of the first formulation which was to be examined by the Committee.

In terms of the Cabinet decision, pensions of pre-2016 pensioners were revised as per the second formulation multiplying existing pension by a fitment factor of 2.57, though the pensioners were to be given the option of choosing the more beneficial of the two formulations as per the 7th CPC recommendations.

In order to provide the more beneficial option to the pensioners, Cabinet has accepted the recommendations of the Committee, which has suggested revision of pension based on information contained in the Pension Payment Order (PPO) issued to every pensioner.  The revised procedure of fixation of notional pay is more scientific, rational and implementable in all the cases.  The Committee reached its findings based on an analysis of hundreds of live pension cases.  The modified formulation will be beneficial to more pensioners than the first formulation recommended by the 7th CPC, which was not found to be feasible to implement on account of non-availability of records in a large number of cases and was also found to be prone to several anomalies. 

2. Disability Pension for Defence Pensioners

The Cabinet also approved the retention of percentage-based regime of disability pension implemented post 6th CPC, which the 7th CPC had recommended to be replaced by a slab-based system.
           
The issue of disability pension was referred to the National Anomaly Committee by the Ministry of Defence on account of the representation received from the Defence Forces to retain the slab-based system, as it would have resulted in reduction in the amount of disability pension for existing pensioners and a reduction in the amount of disability pension for future retirees when compared to percentage-based disability pension. 

The decision which will benefit existing and future Defence pensioners would entail an additional expenditure of approximately Rs. 130 crore per annum.


Empowered Committee may take 2-3 weeks to screen Committee on Allowances' report

7th Pay Commission: The report is being examined by the Department of Expenditure, and will be subsequently placed before the Empowered Committee of Secretaries (E-CoS).

New Delhi, May 5: The long-pending issue of higher allowances under the 7th Pay Commission won't be taken up by the Union Cabinet anytime soon as the Empowered Committee of Secretaries (E-CoS) may take 2-3 weeks to screen the Committee on Allowances' report. Finance Secretary Ashok Lavasa led Committee on Allowances, which examined the 7th Pay Commission recommendations on allowances, submitted its report to the finance ministry on April 27. The report is being examined by the Department of Expenditure, and will be subsequently placed before the Empowered Committee of Secretaries (E-CoS).

According to a report, the Empowered Committee of Secretaries will examine the Committee on Allowances report on higher allowances under the 7th Pay Commission after it gets cleared by Department of Expenditure. The Empowered Committee of Secretaries could take 2-3 weeks to screen the Committee on Allowances' report and will then firm up the proposal for approval of the Cabinet. The Union Cabinet on Wednesday notified the pending implementation of revised pay hike for armed forces under the 7th Pay Commission, but didn't review the Lavasa panel report.

The National Joint Council of Action (NJCA) chief Shiv Gopal Mishra held a meeting with Cabinet Secretary P K Sinha and urged the timely implementation of the Committee on Allowances report on higher allowances under the 7th Pay Commission. P K Sinha heads the Empowered Committee of Secretaries. Mishra also reiterated the demand on arrears on higher allowances. He (PK Sinha) said our concerns would be considered. It may take time. We told him how long should the employees wait? They have been waiting now for more than 10 months, the NJCA chief told India.com when asked about Sinha s response to the demands raised by union.

The central government employees have been waiting for fatter allowance since July when the government issued the notification for the implementation of the 7th Pay Commission recommendations. While the government has provided arrears since January 1, 2016, the scheduled date of 7th Pay Commission s implementation, NJCA has demanded a similar release of arrears on allowances as well. The 7th Pay Commission had suggested the abolition of 52 out of the 196 existing allowances, apart from subsuming 36 smaller allowances. The 7CPC panel led by Justice (retd) A K Mathur had also reduced the house rent allowance (HRA) from existing 10, 20 and 30 per cent to 8, 24 and 16 respectively.


E-platform for govt staff soon to report sexual harassment

NEW DELHI: In a move aimed at strengthening the framework against sexual harassment at workplace, the ministry of women and child development is set to launch an e-platform this month to enable women employees of the central government to file their complaints in such cases online. It will be a reporting mechanism like the e-box for cases of sexual abuse of children.

The Union government has a strength of 30.87 lakh employees. According to the census of central government employees of 2011, women constitute 10.93% of the total force.

"We are going to launch an online platform where women can file sexual harassment-related complaints," Women and Child Development (WCD) Minister Maneka Gandhi told reporters on the sidelines of a workshop for capacity building of chairpersons of internal complaints committees of ministries and departments. The e-platform will be hosted on the WCD ministry's website.
"We hope our ICCs work in such a way that hopefully , we won't have the need for using such a platform to seek redressal. Also, we have had an e-box facility for the last one year for children to file complaints anonymously . We have received hundreds of cases through that," Maneka said.

Cabinet approves modification in pension for Central pensioners / family pensioners

The actual quantum of hike or the revised calculation procedure has not been made public yet. We have to wait for issuance of proper O.M. in this regard.

The Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved important proposals relating to modifications in the 7th CPC (Central Pay Commission) recommendations on pay and pensionary benefits in the course of their implementation. Earlier, in June, 2016, the Cabinet had approved implementation of the recommendations with an additional financial outgo of Rs 84,933 crore for 2016-17 (including arrears for 2 months of 2015-16).


Extension of last date of receipt of application for online engagement of GDS


Transfer and Posting in the Grade of Assistant Engineer (Electrical)

To view, please CLICK HERE.

Transfer and Posting in the Grade of Assistant Engineer (Civil)

To view, please CLICK HERE. 

Revision/Amendment in Recruitment Rules for the post of Postal Service Group 'B'

To view the full copy of above memo, please CLICK HERE. 

All the members and CHQ office bearers are directed to read the contents of above said memo very carefully and submit their views/comments if any to GS immediately.

Tuesday, May 2, 2017

The Law is Clear: Reserved Category Candidates Are Entitled to General Seats on the Basis of Merit

Written By Admin on Apr 29, 2017 | April 29, 2017

There is no law prescribing reservation for general category candidates in public employment and therefore there’s no question of reserved category candidates being selected against “their seats”.
Supreme Court. Credit: JSW

Some newspapers have misreported a recent judgment (Deepa EV v. Union of India) of the Supreme Court, claiming that the judgment states that candidates from the “reserved” category (SC/ST/OBC) can’t claim seats in the general category in any case. Such claims state that 50% of all seats are completely “reserved” for the general category, and no SC/ST/OBC person can have a claim on such seats, even on the basis of merit. However, the actual judgment does not imply anything of this sort. Moreover, the law on this point – whether reserved category candidates can claim seats in the general category on the basis of merit – is very clear.

In Deepa E.V., the appellant belonged to the OBC category and had availed age relaxation (as was granted to OBC category candidates). Since no candidate from the general category had secured the minimum cut-off score, the appellant filed a writ petition before the high court to be accommodated in the general category. The high court dismissed the petition. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision and held that:

“The appellant, who has applied under OBC Category by availing age relaxation and also attending the interview under the ‘OBC Category’ cannot claim right to be appointed under the General Category.”

The reason, as per the court, was “there is an express bar for the candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC who have availed relaxation for being considered for General Category candidates.” The court was reading the existing rules and proceedings of Department of Personnel and Training, which stated that: “[W]hen a relaxed standard is applied in selecting an SC/ST/OBC candidates, for example in the age-limit, experience, qualification, permitted number of chances in written examination, extended zone of consideration larger than what is provided for general category candidates, etc., the SC/ST/OBC candidates are to be counted against reserved vacancies. Such candidates would be deemed as unavailable for consideration against unreserved vacancies.”

On similar lines, in 2015, in Gujarat Public Service Commission v. Parmar Nilesh Rajendrakumar, the Gujarat high court had held that:
“Considering the reservation policy applicable in the State of Gujarat contained in circular dated 29.01.2000 and 23.07.2004 and relevant statutory provisions i.e. Recruitment Rules, 1967, 2009 and 2010, it is held that all those candidates belonging to the reserved category if they avail the benefit of age relaxation, it is held to be relaxation in the standard, and therefore, are not entitled to their cases being considered for General Category vacancies and that their cases are required to be considered for the reserved category vacancies.”
The proposition developed by the courts in these two judgments is that when there is an existing policy regarding the express bar for those SC/ST/OBCs who have availed relaxation (such as age-relaxation) in a selection process, such “reserved” category candidates won’t be entitled to seats in the general category, even on the basis of merit. However, in Deepa E.V., the court had also observed: “Be it noted, in the instant case, the appellant has not challenged the constitutional validity of the proceedings dated 1.7.1998 read with Rule 9 of the Export Inspection Agency (Recruitment) Rules, 1980… [T]he appellant has only sought for a declaration that Exhibit P5 (proceedings dated 1.7.1998) is not binding on the appellant. No argument was canvassed challenging the constitutional validity of the proceedings before the learned Single Judge or before the Division Bench of the High Court.”
This observation by the Supreme Court is quite important in context of the correct position of the law on this issue. This is because if the constitutional validity of these proceedings had been challenged, they would have been struck down, as they are inconsistent with a number of decisions made by the Supreme Court and the high courts.

In the case of Jitendra Kumar Singh v. State of UP(2010), the Supreme Court was considering the UP Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act, 1994 Act (“UP Act”) and government order dated March 25, 1994. The order stated: “If any person belonging to reserved categories is selected on the basis of merits in open competition along with general category candidates, then he will not be adjusted towards reserved category, that is, he shall be deemed to have been adjusted against the unreserved vacancies. It shall be immaterial that he has availed any facility or relaxation (like relaxation in age limit) available to reserved category.” The Supreme Court thereby stated that a bare perusal of the order implies that there is no express bar in the UP Act for SC/ST/OBC candidates being considered for posts under the general category. It held:
“From the above it becomes quite apparent that the relaxation in age limit is merely to enable the reserved category candidate to compete with the general category candidate, all other things being equal. The State has not treated the relaxation in age and fee as relaxation in the standard for selection, based on the merit of the candidate in the selection test i.e. Main Written Test followed by Interview. Therefore, such relaxations cannot deprive a reserved category candidate of the right to be considered as a general category candidate on the basis of merit in the competitive examination. Sub-section (2) of Section 8 further provides that Government Orders in force on the commencement of the Act in respect of the concessions and relaxations including relaxation in upper age limit which are not inconsistent with the Act continue to be applicable till they are modified or revoked.”
The court made it clear that: “With age relaxation and the fee concession, the reserved candidates are merely brought within the zone of consideration, so that they can participate in the open competition on merit.”

In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) popularly known as the Mandal case, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had held:
“[It] is well to remember that the reservations under Article 16(4) do not operate like a communal reservation. It may well happen that some members belonging to, say, Scheduled Castes get selected in the open competition field on the basis of their own merit; they will not be counted against the quota reserved for Scheduled Castes; they will be treated as open competition candidates.”
In R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab (1995), the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court considered the question of appointment and promotion and roster points vis-a-vis reservation and thereby held:
  • “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…
  • No general category candidate can be appointed against a slot in the roster which is reserved for the Backward Class. The fact that considerable number of members of a Backward Class have been appointed/promoted against general seats in the State Services may be a relevant factor for the State Government to review the question of continuing reservation for the said class but so long as the instructions/rules providing certain percentage of reservations for the Backward Classes are operative the same have to be followed. Despite any number of appointees/promotees belonging to the Backward Classes against the general category posts the given percentage has to be provided in addition.”
  • In Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan (1995), the Supreme Court held that while determining the number of posts reserved for SC and ST, the candidates belonging to reserved category but selected/promoted on the rule of merit (and not by virtue of rule of reservation) shall not be counted as reserved category candidates.
In Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul (1996), the question was whether a reserved category candidate who is entitled to be selected for admission in open competition on the basis of his/her own merit should be counted against the quota meant for the reserved category or if the candidate should be treated as a general candidate. The court reached the conclusion that when a candidate is admitted to an educational institution on his own merit, then such admission is not to be counted against the quota reserved for schedule castes or any other reserved category. It was held so in the following words:
“[W]hile a reserved category candidate entitled to admission on the basis of his merit will have the option of taking admission in the colleges where a specified number of seats have been kept reserved for reserved category but while computing the percentage of reservation he will be deemed to have been admitted as an open category candidate and not as a reserved category candidate.”

In Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences v. Dubbasi Praveen Kumar, the division of the Andhra Pradesh & Telangana high court held:
“There cannot be any dispute with the proposition that if a candidate is entitled to be admitted on the basis of his own merit then such admission should not be counted against the quota reserved for Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or any other reserved category since that will be against the constitutional mandate enshrined in Article 16(4).”
Moreover, in UP Power Corporation Ltd v. Nitin Kumar (Special Appeal No. 310 of 2015, judgment dated 19.05.2015), the division bench of the Allahabad high court, headed by the then chief justice D.Y. Chandrachud, had held that an unreserved post or seat/general category seat is one in which every individual, irrespective of the category to which the person belongs, can compete in open merit. It was further held:
“Where a candidate is meritorious enough to be placed within the zone of selected candidates independent of any claim of reservation and purely on the basis of the merit of the candidate, the candidate ought not to be relegated to a seat against the reserved category. The simple reason for this principle is that reservation is a process by which a certain number of posts or seats is carved out for stipulated categories such as OBC, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Unreserved seats do not constitute a reservation for candidates belonging to categories other than the reserved categories.”
Thus, there is no law prescribing reservation for general category candidates in public employment and therefore there does not arise any question of the reserved category candidates occupying or being selected against “their seats”. Since there is no concept of providing reservation to general category candidates, there cannot be any concept of “their fixed seats”. Such seats can be claimed by everyone on basis of merit. The judgment in the Deepa E.V. case is incomplete. Based on the precedents mentioned, the correct position would be that there can’t be any limitation on the reserved category candidates to claim a seat in the general category on the basis of merit. The relaxations provided are merely to bring the candidates of the reserved” category in a level-playing field, which is the spirit under the text of Article 16(4) of the Indian constitution.

The author is a final year student of B.A. LL.B (Hons.) at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. His twitter handle is @anuragbhaskar_