ANURAG PATEL versus U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.

ANURAG PATEL versus U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.

Appointment to posts in combined competitive examinations must strictly follow inter se merit among reserved category candidates, considering both those appointed on general merit and those against reserved vacancies, treating each service separately for allocation, so meritorious candidates are not disadvantaged in...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Anurag Patel; Respondent: U.P. Public Service Commission and Ors.; Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia; Appellant: Nankin Ram (Anurag Patel); Petitioner: Shri Rama Shanker Maurya; Petitioner: Shri Abdul Samad; Advocate: Rajiv Dutta; Advocate: R.N. Trivedi; Advocate: P.N. Misra; Advocate: T.N. Singh; Advocate: V.K. Singh; Advocate: S.N. Singh; Advocate: Ravi Prakash Mehrotra; Advocate: Mrs. Deepti R. Mehrotra; Advocate: Garvesh Kabra; Advocate: Shail Kumar Dwivedi; Advocate: G. Venkateshwara Rao; Advocate: Ms. Shweta Garg; Advocate: Mohmmad Shoeb Alam; Advocate: K.L. Mehta & Co.; Advocate: Pradeep Misra; Advocate: Himanshu Munshi; Advocate: R.P. Gupta; Advocate: A.S. Pundir; Advocate: Vibhakar Mishra; Advocate: Pankaj Kumar; Advocate: K.L. Janjani
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Disposition of Appeals Following Allahabad High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Reservation, Seniority, Direct Recruitment, Combined Competitive Examination, Government Instructions on Allocation, Inter Se Merit
Service Law Reservation Seniority Direct Recruitment Combined Competitive Examination Government Instructions on Allocation Inter Se Merit

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anurag Patel

Appellant

U.P. Public Service Commission and Ors.

Respondent

Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia

Respondent

Nankin Ram (Anurag Patel)

Appellant

Shri Rama Shanker Maurya

Petitioner

Shri Abdul Samad

Petitioner

Rajiv Dutta

Advocate

R.N. Trivedi

Advocate

P.N. Misra

Advocate

T.N. Singh

Advocate

V.K. Singh

Advocate

S.N. Singh

Advocate

Ravi Prakash Mehrotra

Advocate

Mrs. Deepti R. Mehrotra

Advocate

Garvesh Kabra

Advocate

Shail Kumar Dwivedi

Advocate

G. Venkateshwara Rao

Advocate

Ms. Shweta Garg

Advocate

Mohmmad Shoeb Alam

Advocate

K.L. Mehta & Co.

Advocate

Pradeep Misra

Advocate

Himanshu Munshi

Advocate

R.P. Gupta

Advocate

A.S. Pundir

Advocate

Vibhakar Mishra

Advocate

Pankaj Kumar

Advocate

K.L. Janjani

Advocate

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Disposition of Appeals Following Allahabad High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Allocation of inter se seniority among reserved candidates securing higher rank and selected on general merit vis-a-vis candidates standing lower in merit list but selected against reserved vacancies
  2. 2 Whether government instructions regarding allocation of posts and reservation were followed correctly in combined competitive examination

Ratio Decidendi

Appointment to posts in combined competitive examinations must strictly follow inter se merit among reserved category candidates, considering both those appointed on general merit and those against reserved vacancies, treating each service separately for allocation, so meritorious candidates are not disadvantaged in postings.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • State directed to carry out exercise of reallocation within three months according to merit list; affected officers given opportunity of being heard and accommodation to extent possible.