Maharashtra PSC Exam: Supreme Court Restores Reserved Female Category Benefit for Candidate
The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment dated 29 January 2024, addressed an important issue concerning the eligibility for female reservation in the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) State Services Examination. The case, Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni vs. Maharashtra Public Service Commission, revolved around whether a candidate who could not initially apply under the ‘Reserved Female Category’ due to the lack of a Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) certificate should be allowed to claim the benefit after a subsequent government corrigendum relaxed the eligibility criteria.
Background of the Case
The Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) issued an advertisement on 11 May 2022 for the State Services Preliminary Examination to recruit Group A and Group B officers under the Maharashtra Government. Under Paragraph 5.5 of the advertisement, female candidates seeking reservation had to meet two conditions:
- Be domiciled in Maharashtra.
- Belong to the Non-Creamy Layer (NCL).
Further, Paragraphs 5.10 and 5.14 required candidates availing female reservation to submit an NCL Certificate valid as of the last date of application submission, which was 1 June 2022.
The Candidate’s Situation
Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni, a candidate employed as a State Tax Officer in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Department in Pune, was otherwise eligible for the ‘Reserved Female Category.’ However, she could not apply under this category because she did not possess a valid NCL Certificate as of 1 June 2022. As a result, she applied under the Open General Category.
Despite this, Priyanka Kulkarni successfully cleared:
- The Preliminary Examination.
- The Main Examination on 11 October 2023, under the Open General Category.
Government Corrigendum and Subsequent Appeal
On 17 February 2023, the Maharashtra Government issued a corrigendum amending the rules for NCL Certificate submission. The corrigendum modified an earlier circular, allowing candidates to submit an NCL Certificate valid in the current financial year instead of one valid as of the last date of submission.
After obtaining her NCL Certificate on 9 March 2023, Priyanka Kulkarni applied to be considered under the ‘Reserved Female Category’ based on the new corrigendum.
Denial of Benefit and Legal Challenge
Her request was denied by the MPSC, leading her to file an application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT). The MAT dismissed her case on 7 July 2023, stating that she did not possess an NCL Certificate at the time of the corrigendum.
She then approached the Bombay High Court, which also rejected her plea in its judgment dated 7 December 2023, stating:
“If the Petitioner was desirous of making an application for General Women Category, she ought to have obtained the NCL in advance showing diligence, which she has failed. At this stage, if the Petitioner is allowed to change her category, it will open a floodgate of litigation.”
Petitioner’s Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Before the Supreme Court, Priyanka Kulkarni, represented by her counsel, argued:
- She had applied under the Open General Category only because of the previously strict NCL rules.
- After the corrigendum relaxed the requirement, her eligibility for female reservation was revived, and her case should be reconsidered.
- Other candidates who had wrongly applied under the Reserved Female Category without a valid NCL Certificate were later allowed to benefit from the corrigendum, while she was denied the same treatment.
Respondent’s Arguments (MPSC)
The MPSC opposed her claim, arguing:
- Once a candidate selects a category, they cannot switch categories after the application submission deadline.
- The candidate had failed to mark ‘Yes’ in the application form when asked if she belonged to the Non-Creamy Layer.
- Only candidates who had initially applied under the Reserved Female Category, even without an NCL Certificate, were granted the benefit under the corrigendum.
Supreme Court’s Judgment
The Supreme Court, comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, ruled in favor of Priyanka Kulkarni.
Key observations:
- The corrigendum changed the eligibility criteria for NCL Certificate submission, and denying the benefit to the petitioner was unfair.
- The Instructions of the MPSC, which prohibited modifications after submission, could not override the corrigendum.
- The petitioner had followed the original rules honestly, unlike other candidates who falsely applied under the Reserved Female Category without an NCL Certificate.
- It was an overly technical interpretation of rules to deny her the corrigendum’s benefits while granting them to others.
Consequently, the Court:
- Set aside the judgments of the Bombay High Court and the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.
- Directed MPSC to consider her as a Reserved Female Category candidate.
Impact of the Judgment
This judgment has far-reaching implications for competitive examinations:
- Ensures equal treatment for candidates under revised eligibility rules.
- Prevents arbitrary denials of benefits due to technicalities.
- Strengthens the principle that corrigenda should be applied fairly to all eligible candidates.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s judgment in Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni vs. Maharashtra Public Service Commission reinforces fairness in competitive exams. By ruling that corrigenda should be applied uniformly, the Court has ensured that technicalities do not deprive deserving candidates of their rightful benefits.
Petitioner Name: Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni.Respondent Name: Maharashtra Public Service Commission.Judgment By: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.Place Of Incident: Maharashtra.Judgment Date: 29-01-2024.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: priyanka-prakash-kul-vs-maharashtra-public-s-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-29-01-2024.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Recruitment Policies
See all petitions in Promotion Cases
See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Disciplinary Proceedings
See all petitions in Judgment by Vikram Nath
See all petitions in Judgment by Satish Chandra Sharma
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments January 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments
See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
