Carrying F/w services- unfair

In the examination 2005 vacancies were 457. Out of 425 selected in the first list , only 402 were given services as per latest figure of DoPT web site. That means remaining 23 candidates(13 OBC, 04 General, 04 SC and 02 ST) were probably were rejected. DoPT can come out more clearly on this. Out of this 402, around 40 did not join services as they were already in better services from previous year examination or did not want to join. Now the figure comes to around 360. In the examination 2006 and 2007 it is known that around 30 more again got better services. Thus the remaining candidate would work out to roughly 325 for a post of 425.

In that event, if counseling is conducted by calling remaining candidates, then it will benefit each candidate irrespective of community. Year after year large number of vacancies go unfilled . If counseling is conducted in the pattern of Engineering admissions then, more serious candidates would attend it and get services. This would obviate the emergence of unfilled vacancies and also would improve transparency of the system besides promoting economy. The attention is drawn to a 1982 letter DoP&T OM No. 22011/2/79-Estt. (D) Dated 8^th Feb 1982, directs that:

“…..3. Normally, recruitment whether from the open market or through a Departmental Competitive Examination should take place only when there are no candidates available from an earlier list of selected candidates. However, there is a likelihood of vacancies arising in future; in case, names of selected candidates are already available, there should either be no further recruitment till the available selected candidates are absorbed or the declared vacancies for next examination should take into account the number of persons already on the list of selected candidates awaiting appointment. Thus there would be no limit on the period of validity of the list of selected candidates prepared to the extent of declared vacancies , either by the method of direct recruitment or through a Departmental Competitive Examination….”

If counseling is allowed for allotting services, then more number of candidates can get selected from 2005 examination. The DoPT must also consider bringing back the system of waiting list as has been in practice till year 1993. It is a known fact that every year large number of vacancies go un-allotted and there is no concept of waiting list. The waiting list system has been arbitrarily done away with from 1994 onwards and as a the result large number vacancies get transferred to subsequent years for no mistake of candidates who actually competed for the examination. It also results in delayed filling up of vacancies. All this can be solved once counseling system is undertaken.

Quotes from Anurag patel Case

Case Details:

In Anurag Patel Vs Uttar Pradesh Sate Public Service commission(2005 9 SCC 742), the Apex court was approached by OBC candidates who got selection in general. Two of them who has secured rank 13 and 14 in the merit list, were appointed as Sales Tax Officer-II, whereas the persons who secured rank Nos. 38, 72 and 97, ranks lower to them, got appointment as Deputy Collectors. This anomaly was corrected by the court which ordered to prepare a list combining OBCs and OBCs who came in general as per rank and person higher in rank will get service of his choice. If this case is applied, then there will be 190 OBCs plus 76 OBCs who came in merit. A combined list of 266 needs to be prepared and services originally available to them earlier against their rank be redistributed so that higher ranked candidate will get higher preferred service. This was done in the results declared on 16th May 2008 due to the verdict of Mardas High Court.

The Anurag Patel verdict says,

"... list of all selected Backward candidates shall be prepared separately including those candidates selected in the general category and their appointments to the posts shall be strictly in accordance with the merit as per the select list and preference of person higher in the select list will be seen first and appointment given accordingly, while preference of person lower in the list will be seen only later. We do not think any error or illegality in the direction issued by the Division Bench of the High Court”

By this there will be no change in the total number of services available to this category. The logic behind this methodology is that when it comes to service allocation, OBC candidates who obtained higher ranking in unreserved category should not be put to a disadvantage in comparison to those OBC’s who come by relaxed standards. At the same time, it will not be detrimental to the interests of reserved candidates who could have got selection but were not. This is the only way by which the community wise representation will not be altered. This methodology does not alter or affect other community’s share in selection and allotment. Had this methodology been followed, 266 OBC candidates and 129 SC would have been selected against their present number of 190 OBC and 109 SC. It would also ensure that slots vacated by reserved candidates from general would only go to some other reserved candidates.

Instead of taking cognizance of Anurag Patel verdict, the authorities take stand that this verdict cannot be applied in Civil Service Examination. The Combined State Services/Upper Subordinate Services Examination conducted by UPPSC is similar to Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC in which several services, like UP Civil (Executive) Service (for Dy. Collector Posts), UP Police Service (for DSP posts), UP Finance & Accounts Service(for Treasury Officer/Accounts Officer Posts) etc. participate each year. The pattern of Combined State Services Examination conducted by UPPSC is also similar to Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC. The process of selection in the above said examination conducted by UPPSC is also done in three stages, viz, preliminary examination, mains examination and the personality test/interview, as is done for Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC. Hence their stand does not seem to be valid