The Supreme Court has made it clear—taking physical standard relaxations under a reserved category doesn’t automatically lock a candidate out of competing for unreserved seats, unless the recruitment rules themselves say so.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi gave this ruling while rejecting the plea of a general category aspirant who missed out on selection for the post of CISF Assistant Commandant (Executive) by just one mark. His complaint was against an ST candidate who had used relaxed height standards but still scored higher marks and was picked against a general category seat.
The appellant, who scored 363 against the cut-off of 364, argued that the ST candidate with 366 marks should have been restricted to an ST-reserved post since he had availed a relaxation. But the Court disagreed, noting that the CISF’s recruitment memorandum did not list physical measurement relaxations as a bar for migration to the general category.
Justice Bagchi, writing for the bench, pointed out that an official memorandum dated July 1, 1998, made no mention of disqualifying reserved candidates who had taken such relaxations from competing for unreserved seats on merit. The Court contrasted this with rules in Railway Protection Force recruitment, where explicit provisions bar such cross-category consideration.
Concluding that no such restriction existed for the CISF selection process, the Court upheld the reserved category candidate’s appointment and dismissed the appeal.