Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 28-11-2017 in case of petitioner name Khilendra Singh vs Union of India
| |

Supreme Court Clarifies OBC Reservation in Government Jobs: Key Ruling on Central List Applicability

The case of Khilendra Singh vs. Union of India revolves around the crucial question of whether a candidate belonging to the ‘Jaat’ caste in Uttar Pradesh was eligible for a central government job under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. The Supreme Court’s ruling in this matter clarifies the applicability of state-level OBC lists versus the Central List and ensures strict compliance with established reservation policies.

Background of the Case

Khilendra Singh applied for a Subject Matter Specialist position (Crop Protection & Crop Psychology) at Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan, Almora. He was selected under the OBC category based on an OBC certificate issued by the Tehsildar of Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, on June 22, 2007. His appointment took effect on January 2, 2008.

However, Singh was later issued a show-cause notice questioning his OBC status for central government employment. Following an inquiry, the authorities found that the ‘Jaat’ caste was not in the Central List of OBCs at the time of appointment. Consequently, his appointment was terminated on November 20, 2010.

Legal Framework Governing OBC Reservations

The case primarily revolved around the provisions of the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993 (NCBC Act):

  • Section 9: Grants the NCBC authority to recommend the inclusion or exclusion of castes in the OBC list.
  • Section 2(c): Defines ‘lists’ as those prepared by the Government of India for reservation purposes.

The Central List of OBCs was finalized in 1993, and the ‘Jaat’ caste was not included for Uttar Pradesh. Though the NCBC reconsidered this in 1997, it recommended inclusion only for Rajasthan, not Uttar Pradesh.

Petitioner’s Arguments

Khilendra Singh’s legal team put forth the following arguments:

  • He had a valid OBC certificate issued by a competent state authority.
  • The ‘Jaat’ caste was later included in the Central List in 2014, confirming its backward status.
  • Since the caste was recognized in Uttar Pradesh’s state list at the time of appointment, he should be deemed eligible for OBC reservation in central services.
  • The termination order was arbitrary and unjust as it did not consider the evolving status of the caste.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Union of India countered:

  • For central government jobs, only the Central List is relevant.
  • The petitioner’s caste was not recognized in the Central List of OBCs at the time of his appointment.
  • The later inclusion of the ‘Jaat’ caste in 2014 had no retrospective effect.
  • OBC reservations must be implemented strictly per the prevailing legal framework at the time of recruitment.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

Justices S.A. Bobde and L. Nageswara Rao examined the relevant legal provisions and precedents. The key observations included:

  • Appointments to central posts must follow the Central List of OBCs, not state lists.
  • Even if a candidate has a valid state-level OBC certificate, they cannot claim benefits for central services unless their caste appears in the Central List.
  • The 2014 inclusion of ‘Jaat’ caste in the Central List could not be applied retroactively to benefit past appointees.

The Court noted:

“We approve the final conclusion of the High Court that the appellant was not entitled for appointment in the post reserved for OBCs, though for different reasons.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the legality of the termination. The ruling ensures that government recruitment policies remain consistent and that eligibility for reservations is determined strictly based on the Central List.

Implications of the Judgment

This decision reinforces several key principles regarding OBC reservations:

  • Only the Central List is applicable for central government jobs.
  • State-issued OBC certificates do not confer eligibility unless the caste is listed in the Central List.
  • Subsequent changes to reservation lists do not have retrospective effect.
  • Government authorities must verify caste status strictly at the time of appointment.

This ruling serves as an essential precedent, guiding future cases involving disputed caste classifications in central government employment.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Khilendra Singh vs Union of India Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 28-11-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Recruitment Policies
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Termination Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by S. A. Bobde
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments November 2017
See all petitions in 2017 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

Similar Posts