The Allahabad High Court has quashed the results declared for Preliminary examination UP PCS 2021 without giving benefit of Reservation to former Armymen.
A Single Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Jwo Satish Chandra Shukla and three others.
The writ petition has been filed by four Junior Commissioned Officers (retired from the Army after completing the required number of years of service) praying for a Mandamus to be issued to the UP Public Service Commission through its Secretary (Second Respondent), to implement with necessary followup action, the UP Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex-servicemen) Amendment Act, 2021; in its letter and spirit in the ongoing selection process for Combined State Upper Subordinate Services (PCS) Examination 2021 and Assistant Conservator of Forest/Range Forest Officer Services Examination 2021.
The Counsel for the petitioners argued that before 1993, reservation for physically-handicapped, dependents of freedom fighters, and ex-servicemen were regulated by various Government Orders issued by the then National Integration Department of the Government of India.
Several Circulars were issued from time to time by the State of UP as well to regulate the percentage of reservation in Group A, B, C and D posts of Public Services. Initially 8% reservation was granted in Group A and B posts each and 3% reservation was granted in group C and D posts each. On 30.12.1993 for the first time the Reservation Policy in the State of U.P was sought to be codified for providing horizontal reservation to certain categories of persons and the U.P Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and ExServicemen) Act 1993 was notified and 5% reservation was granted to the persons belonging to the aforesaid Categories in vacancies in Group A, B, C and D posts. On 31.07.1997 the Principal Act was amended to clarify the percentage among different sub-categories of beneficiaries. On 28.07.1999 after the Victory in Kargil War, as a mark of respect for its ex-servicemen, the percentage of reservation for ex-servicemen was increased to 5% but Group A and B posts of Public Services were excluded.
The decision was challenged in Writ Petition by petitioner no1 Satish Chandra Shukla. The writ petition was admitted and the Court passed a detailed order on 6.03.2019 wherein the Court noted the argument of the petitioners that ex-defence personnel were getting reservation in all categories of posts in Public Services since 1948 through Government Orders but now by way of Amendment in the 1993 Act reservation in Group A and Group B posts had been removed while ex defence personnel have served the nation with all dedication and integrity in all difficult times. A counter affidavit was filed in the said writ petition wherein the respondents stated that the matter had been referred to the State Government for its consideration and it was pending at the appropriate level.
Later, an Amendment was notified on 10.03.2021 in the Principal Act by UP Act No 14 of 2021 and existing Clause (i-a) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Principal Act was substituted and 5% reservation was provided in Public Services on all posts other than Group A posts, on and from the date on which the amendment was published in the Gazette. The Amendment Act was notified in the Gazette on 10.03.2021.
In the meantime on 5.02.2021 an Advertisement was issued by the Second Respondent for Upper Subordinate/ PCS and Assistant Conservator of Forest/Range Forest Officers Services Examination. The last date for submission of online forms was 05.03.2021 which was extended for correction of forms up to 17.03.2021 by way of a press release dated 10.3.2021. The petitioners had applied in general category but specifying that they were exArmy personnel for the purposes of age relaxation and any other benefits available to them under the Principal Act as amended from time to time.
On 27.08.2021 in a reply sent by the Public Information Officer of the Second Respondent to RTI application, the Second Respondent stated that the Government Order with regard to reservation of ex servicemen was issued on 16.03.2021 after the last date of 05.03.2021 for submission of application forms, hence implying that they were not going to implement the 2021 Amendment in the PCS Examination 2021.
On 24.10.2021 the petitioners appeared in Preliminary examinations at various centres. The result of the Preliminary examination was declared on 1.12.2021. The petitioners failed to qualify.
It has been argued by the counsel for the petitioners that if the 2021 Amendment had been applied then they would have qualified and got a chance to appear in the Main written examination. While this opportunity was denied to ex Army men for PCS And ACF/RFO exams on 29.12.2021, a corrigendum was issued by the Second Respondent in respect of another similar advertisement for Review Officers and Assistant Review Officers Examinations where the last date for submission of forms was 05.04.2021.
The counsel for the U.P Public Service Commission had argued that only those candidates were entitled to be considered as OBC who were recognised as OBC on the last date of submission of application form and had applied in that category. Both Jat community candidates and Kalwar candidates having not been declared OBC before the last date of submission of application forms had not applied in that category.
The Court observed that,
Having heard the arguments for the counsel for the parties, the Court on careful consideration of the judgments cited by the counsel for the Second Respondent finds that the last date of submission of application form which is being insisted upon by the Second Respondent is only so far as educational qualification for eligibility is concerned, and it shall not affect reservation to be applied on vacancies after selection is over and at the time of publication of select list. Finality is attached to the last date of submission of application forms only for the purpose of determining eligibility criteria and not for the purpose of preparing the final select list giving reservations.
The Court said that, in the case of the petitioners before the Court, they had already claimed benefit of being ex-Army personnel at the time of filing of their application forms in so far as praying for relaxation in age was concerned. Also, the last date for submission of application forms had been extended by the Second Respondent by a Press Release on 10.03.2021 upto 17.03.2021. Group B posts were included by way of Amendment in the Act notified on 15.03.2021 before the extended date of submission of application forms i.e 17.03.2021. The 2021 Amendment itself made the benefit applicable on and from the date of publication in the official Gazette. It did not require any separate Government Order to be issued to make it applicable. The Legislature had consciously avoided adding any sub-clause to Section 5 of the Principal Act saving ongoing selections as it had done on earlier occasions when the Second Amendment was notified in 1997 and the Third Amendment was notified in 1999. The intention of the Legislature being clear, the Second Respondent out of obduracy has refused to extend the benefit to the petitioners of reservation in Group B posts. As per the advertisement issued on 05.02.2021 there are 676 Group B posts and 2 posts in Group C of Naib Tehsildar. If reservation would have been extended before declaration of preliminary examination results at least 10,170 Ex-Armymen (i.e 676×15=10140 and 2×15=30) could have been declared successful in the Preliminary examination as the Second Respondent was to declare a preliminary select list which would have included 15 times the number of vacancies available.
The Court further said that, in the case of the petitioners, they had Claimed the benefit of reservation as ex-army personnel while filing their applications and there was no question of change in category. Moreover they had challenged the action of the second respondent in not giving them the benefit of the 2021 amendment as soon as the preliminary examination results were declared. Preliminary examination is only a qualifying examination. The selection process would be deemed to have started As per the explanation given to the terms selection process in the principal act, Only when the main written examination was held on 23 March 2022. Hence it cannot be said that the petitioners would be stopped From challenging the action of the second respondent on their Having taken part in the selection process.
“When the 2021 Amendment was notified, the portal of the Second Respondent was still open and continued to remain open till 17.03.2021. It has been argued by Nipun Singh that the Press Release dated 10.03. 2021 extending the date of correction of online application by uploading correct photographs and signatures of candidates was meant for that purpose only and should not be treated as a general extension of date.
However, the Court has carefully perused the Press Release dated 10.03.2021 and found that although it refers to the last date of submission of application forms online as 05.03.2021 it also mentioned that some candidates’ photographs and signatures were found to be incorrectly uploaded details of which can be found on the Public Service Commission’s website. Hence such candidates are given the last opportunity to upload the correct photographs and signatures in between 10.03.2021 to 17 .03. 2021.
After such a date, no opportunity to correct their application forms would be given. This Press Release meant that at least till 17.03.2021 the portal of the Second Respondent remained open for making modifications/correction in application forms submitted by candidates although their numbers may be few. If the Second Respondent had been careful enough, it could have extended the benefit of Reservation in Group B posts as notified in 2021 Amendment in the Gazette on 10.03.2021, as the amendment was made applicable on and from the date of its publication in the official Gazette.
However, the Second Respondent was remiss in faithfully carrying out its responsibility and refused to correct its error even when it had time to do so as the actual selection as per the Principal Act was initiated only on 23.03.2022 when the Main written examination was held”, the Court observed while allowing the Writ Petition.
“The Results declared for Preliminary examination without giving benefit of Reservation to Ex-Armymen are vitiated and quashed. Consequently, the Second Respondent is directed to calibrate the result of the Preliminary examination and give benefit of reservation to Ex-Army Personnel on Group-B and Group-C Posts. After publication of Preliminary examination Results within one month, Admit cards be issued for the Main written examination accordingly and results thereof be declared giving 5% reservication on Group-B posts as well to Ex-Army Personnel. Call letters for the interview may be issued accordingly”, the Court ordered.