New Delhi: Supreme court refused to hear a petition seeking dismissal on Friday upsc civil services exam 2020 Final Select List to the extent that it violates the 50% limit of reservation.
Bench of Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice L Nageswara Rao Justice BR Gavai refused to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner, Nitish Shankar, a candidate who appeared in the Civil Services Examination of 2020, Cancel UPSC Civil Services Exam 2020 Final Select List to the extent that it violates the 50% reservation limit.
The court also warned the petitioner’s counsel that it would reject it with a cost and said that the court did not see any point in hearing the counsel further. The court also observed that the right of hearing also comes with certain restrictions and suggested the petitioner counsel not to advise people to file such petitions.
The bench noted that EWS Reservation was introduced under the 103rd Constitutional Amendment and the matter related to it was referred to a larger bench.
The counsel for the petitioner urged for tagging his petition along with the petitions relating to EWS quota before the larger Judge Bench, but could not persuade the Bench. Thereafter the counsel for the petitioner withdrew the petition with the liberty to withdraw the petition. High Court,
The petitioner claimed that he is a meritorious candidate who has been denied equal opportunity for selection in the Union Public Service Commission – Civil Services Examination 2020 (UPSC-CSE-2020).
The petitioner has also sought publication of additional list of candidates considering the petitioner’s case for personal interview and recommending meritorious students of extra general category against the advertised 418 (50 per cent of total vacancy) seats.
According to the petition, respondents has recommended 34.55 per cent candidates for appointment against general category and 65.44 per cent against reserved category, which completely affects the eligibility of general category candidates.
The petitioner submitted that only 40 per cent seats have been earmarked for appointment against the general unreserved quota, which is in violation of the 50 per cent ceiling of reservation, adding that the respondents clearly violated the order of 50 per cent for reservation. worked from. The decision was taken by the 9 judge bench of the Supreme Court. The petitioner submitted that this did not lead to the selection of the petitioner for the personality test and thereafter his appointment after appearing for the main examination (written examination).
Bench of Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice L Nageswara Rao Justice BR Gavai refused to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner, Nitish Shankar, a candidate who appeared in the Civil Services Examination of 2020, Cancel UPSC Civil Services Exam 2020 Final Select List to the extent that it violates the 50% reservation limit.
The court also warned the petitioner’s counsel that it would reject it with a cost and said that the court did not see any point in hearing the counsel further. The court also observed that the right of hearing also comes with certain restrictions and suggested the petitioner counsel not to advise people to file such petitions.
The bench noted that EWS Reservation was introduced under the 103rd Constitutional Amendment and the matter related to it was referred to a larger bench.
The counsel for the petitioner urged for tagging his petition along with the petitions relating to EWS quota before the larger Judge Bench, but could not persuade the Bench. Thereafter the counsel for the petitioner withdrew the petition with the liberty to withdraw the petition. High Court,
The petitioner claimed that he is a meritorious candidate who has been denied equal opportunity for selection in the Union Public Service Commission – Civil Services Examination 2020 (UPSC-CSE-2020).
The petitioner has also sought publication of additional list of candidates considering the petitioner’s case for personal interview and recommending meritorious students of extra general category against the advertised 418 (50 per cent of total vacancy) seats.
According to the petition, respondents has recommended 34.55 per cent candidates for appointment against general category and 65.44 per cent against reserved category, which completely affects the eligibility of general category candidates.
The petitioner submitted that only 40 per cent seats have been earmarked for appointment against the general unreserved quota, which is in violation of the 50 per cent ceiling of reservation, adding that the respondents clearly violated the order of 50 per cent for reservation. worked from. The decision was taken by the 9 judge bench of the Supreme Court. The petitioner submitted that this did not lead to the selection of the petitioner for the personality test and thereafter his appointment after appearing for the main examination (written examination).
,