About Me

My photo
Lawyer Practising at Supreme Court of India. Court Experience: Criminal, Civil & PIL (related to Property, Tax, Custom & Duties, MVAC, insurance, I.P.R., Copyrights & Trademarks, Partnerships, Labour Disputes, etc.) Socio-Legal: Child Rights, Mid Day Meal Programme, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, Women Rights, Against Female Foeticide, P.R.Is, Bonded Labour, Child labour, Child marriage, Domestic violence, Legal Literacy, HIV/AIDS, etc. Worked for Legal Aid/Advise/Awareness/Training/Empowerment/Interventions/Training & Sensitisation.

Contact Me

+91 9971049936, +91 9312079439
Email: adv.kamal.kr.pandey@gmail.com

Friday, March 28, 2008

HC sets aside UPSC merit lists

Chennai, March 21: The Madras High Court has set aside the merit lists prepared by the Union Public Service Commission for the years -- 2006 and 2007 -- and directed the UPSC to rework the list within 12 weeks.
Passing a common order on a spate of writ petitions challenging the results yesterday, Justice Elipe Dharma Rao also held as "null and void" Rule 16 (2) of the Examination Rules of the Government of India for Civil Services Examination which allows adjustment of vacancies in the unreserved category with that of the reserved one.
In all 457 candidates were selected for the final list of both the years. Of this, 31 OBC and one SC candidate made it through the merit list (unreserved) but at the same time availed their postings under the reserved category.
This action by the UPSC, based on Rule 16 (2), deprived equal number of candidates from the said communities of availing the postings, the court held.
"It amounts to reducing the number of posts reserved for the SC/ST/OBC and adding the same number of posts to the unreserved category, thus making a mockery of the entire rule of reservation," the judge said.
This had affected allotment of posts to SC/ST/OBC candidates though those in the unreserved category remained intact, the judge held adding even candidates who got selected on their own merit are being considered as reserved category.
Instead of helping achieving social justice, the rule was acting against the SC/ST/OBC candidates, the Judge observed and held the "impugned Rule 16 (2)" as unconstitutional and null and void in the eye of law. - Agencies
CHENNAIONLINE; Published: Saturday, March 22, 2008

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment