New Delhi, November 1, 2025: In a significant judgment concerning the rights of candidates belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) who secure selection on their own merit, the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has ruled that a candidate selected in the Unreserved (UR) category cannot be denied appointment merely because she did not possess an OBC certificate in the prescribed Central Government format. The Tribunal held that once a candidate is selected on merit against an unreserved vacancy, insistence on an OBC certificate becomes legally unsustainable.
The judgment was
delivered by a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (Judicial)
and Hon'ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (Administrative) in Rajni
Yadav v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Others (O.A. No. 4101/2023).
The applicant was represented by Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr.
Nikhil Pawar, Advocate.
OBC Candidate Selected on
Merit
The dispute arose from
the recruitment process conducted by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) for the
post of Librarian under Advertisement No. 15/2022. Rajni Yadav, who belongs to
the OBC category, had applied under the OBC quota and participated in the
selection process. After successfully clearing the written examination and
interview, she secured 159.15 marks, substantially higher than the Unreserved
category cut-off of 152.66 marks. Consequently, she earned selection on her
own merit and was included in the Unreserved (General) category merit list,
not against any reserved OBC vacancy.
KVS thereafter issued her
an appointment letter dated 30 November 2023 and posted her as Librarian at
Kendriya Vidyalaya, IMA Dehradun. However, when she reported for duty, the
school administration refused to allow her to join on the ground that she had
not produced an OBC certificate in the format prescribed by the Central
Government.
Core Legal Issue: Can an
OBC Candidate Selected in UR Category Be Asked to Prove OBC Status?
The case raised an
important legal question that frequently arises in public employment:
Can a candidate belonging
to a reserved category, who secures selection in the unreserved category on
merit, be denied appointment for failure to satisfy reservation-related
documentation requirements?
The Tribunal answered
this question with a clear and emphatic No.
Tribunal Terms KVS Action
Arbitrary
The Tribunal observed
that the applicant had undoubtedly applied under the OBC category. However,
what was legally relevant was the fact that she had ultimately secured a place
in the unreserved merit list based entirely on her performance. The Bench noted
that her appointment was not made against an OBC vacancy and that even the
appointment letter treated her as a General Category candidate.
In strong observations,
the Tribunal described the respondents' conduct as a "clear case of
arbitrary exercise of power." It held that once the applicant had
secured selection in the unreserved category, demanding an OBC certificate as a
condition for joining service was wholly unjustified.
Reliance on the Landmark
Saurav Yadav Principle
The Tribunal relied upon
the principle laid down in Saurav Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh,
wherein it was recognized that candidates belonging to reserved categories who
secure selection on merit in open competition must be treated as unreserved
candidates and cannot be compelled to consume reserved-category benefits.
Applying the same
principle, the CAT held that Rajni Yadav's merit-based selection in the UR
category completely removed the necessity of establishing entitlement to OBC
reservation. Since she was not claiming the benefit of reservation, the
question of producing a valid OBC certificate for appointment simply did not
arise.
Important Message on
Reservation Policy
The judgment highlights a
fundamental principle of Indian reservation jurisprudence:
Reservation is a
protective mechanism for disadvantaged groups, not a barrier that can be used
against them after they succeed on merit.
The Tribunal effectively
reaffirmed that a candidate's social category cannot be used to deny an
appointment when the candidate has independently crossed the general category
merit threshold. The decision strengthens the constitutional principle that reservation
should expand opportunities rather than become a technical obstacle to
employment.
Relief Granted
Allowing the Original
Application, the Tribunal set aside the decision of KVS refusing to permit the
applicant to join. The respondents were directed to allow her joining within
thirty days. The Bench further ordered that she would be entitled to all consequential
benefits, including seniority. Considering that the denial of joining was
solely attributable to the respondents, the Tribunal also granted 50% of the
salary arrears from the date she initially reported for joining duty.
Tribunal Considers
Imposing Costs
In another noteworthy
observation, the Tribunal remarked that the facts of the case justified the
imposition of heavy costs on the respondents. However, on the request of
counsel appearing for KVS, the Bench refrained from imposing costs and disposed
of the matter without any order as to costs.
Wider Significance
The judgment is likely to
have far-reaching implications for recruitment authorities across India. It
sends a clear message that candidates belonging to SC, ST, OBC, EWS or any
other reserved category who secure selection on open merit cannot be deprived
of appointment because of defects or disputes relating to reservation
certificates when they are not claiming reservation benefits at all.
For thousands of
candidates appearing in government recruitments every year, the ruling
reinforces an important constitutional principle: merit-based selection in
the unreserved category stands independent of reservation-related eligibility
conditions.
[Rajni Yadav v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Others,
O.A. No. 4101/2023, CAT, Delhi, decided on – 01.11.2025]
https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/home.php
Anuj Aggarwal
Advocate
K-17, 2nd Floor, Jangpura Extension,
New Delhi - 110014
483, Block-2, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi-110003
Mobile – 9891403206
Landline – 011 - 35554905
Email – anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com
