Rekha Kumari vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.—Petitioner had earlier approached the High Court by filing a writ application, the order of which is Annexure-5. The respondent Staff Selection Commission considered the grievance of the petitioner and has passed a speaking order contained in Annexure-6. The ground given therein is that the petitioner has herself filled in the column with regard to reservation in the OMR declaring herself to be a general category candidate.

If this is the form which has been processed and the application of the petitioner has been considered on the basis of her declaration on the issue of reservation she cannot be permitted now to turn around and say that she had indicated her caste in other declaration and therefore, her claim should be considered under the backward category candidate and based on the merit position she should be given opening for appointment on the post of SI.

The OMR was furnished to the petitioner: The OMR has already been brought on record as Annexure-A. Having look at the same itself supports the reason given in Annexure-6 as to the ground why she was considered as a general category candidate and was not extended benefit of reservation.

It is quite possible that a young progressive and forward looking candidate did not want to avail benefit of reservation. That could be her motivation to compete with general category candidate. Now not having been made to the select list, she cannot be allowed to have a second, thought on the issue. Annexure-6 requires no interference. Writ application is dismissed.