Shimla: In a significant order on the adherence to reservation norms, the HP High Court has pulled up the state government and the Himachal Pradesh State Selection Commission for misinterpreting merit principles during the TGT (Arts) teacher recruitment process.
Hearing a petition challenging the final results, Justice Ajay Mohan Goyal remarked that recruitment agencies appear to be operating under serious confusion regarding the implementation of basic reservation laws.
Irregularities in Results
The dispute stems from a recruitment advertisement issued by the selection commission on May 25, 2025, inviting applications for 425 posts of TGT (Arts) under Post Code-25001. The seats included 151 positions under the general (unreserved) category and 17 reserved for the Scheduled Caste BPL-SC (BPL)-category.
Following the written examination and evaluation, the petitioner-who had applied under the SC (BPL) category-scored 64 marks and was placed at number one on the waiting list. The last selected candidate in the SC (BPL) category secured 64.58 marks, while the cutoff for the general category stood at 71.31.
However, a compliance report submitted by the commission’s secretary revealed that three candidates from the SC (BPL) category had actually scored higher than the general cutoff of 71.31. Despite their high scores, the commission retained them inside the SC (BPL) quota instead of shifting them to the open general category.
Commission’s Defense Rejected
Defending its allocation, the selection commission argued before the bench that as per instructions issued by the State Personnel Department on November 12, 2014, the “on merit” principle does not apply to horizontal reservation categories, including BPL, ex-servicemen, and persons with disabilities.
The High Court decisively rejected this argument, pointing out that administrative officials were functioning under a fundamental misconception of settled law. Citing the landmark Supreme Court judgment in R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab (1995), Justice Goyal highlighted the statutory principles governing merit and reservations.
Court Mandates Strict Adherence to Supreme Court Ruling
The court clarified that under established law, if a candidate from a reserved category secures marks equal to or higher than the last selected general category candidate on their own merit, they must be counted against the general category seats.
Consequently, the reserved seats vacated by these high-meritorious candidates must then be filled by the next eligible candidates on the reserved merit list, including those on the waiting list.
Following the court’s stern observations, representatives for the selection commission requested additional time to submit a revised formal response. Granting two weeks to clarify its position, the High Court scheduled the next hearing for August 12.
