Tripura HC orders fresh JRBT selection lists, citing errors in PwD reservation implementation. Court mandates merit-based selection and correct horizontal quota application for Group C and D posts, impacting thousands of candidates and ensuring fair recruitment practices.
A judicial directive has reshaped the course of a major recruitment exercise in Tripura, after the Tripura High Court found serious inconsistencies in the application of reservation norms for persons with benchmark disabilities. The ruling mandates a complete overhaul of selection lists prepared by the Joint Recruitment Board of Tripura for thousands of government posts, placing merit and proper reservation procedures at the center of the process.
The decision came from a single bench led by Justice S. Datta Purkayastha while hearing multiple writ petitions challenging recruitment drives conducted under advertisements issued in 2020 and 2021. These drives aimed to fill approximately 2,500 Multi Tasking Staff (Group D) positions and 2,410 Group C posts, including Lower Division Clerk, Agriculture Assistant, and Junior Operator roles.
At the heart of the dispute was the treatment of reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities. Petitioners argued that candidates who secured higher marks were unfairly excluded, while those with lower scores were selected due to an incorrect application of reservation rules. Specifically, they contended that the disability quota was treated as a vertical reservation, rather than a horizontal one, leading to distortions in the final selection lists.
The court agreed with this assessment, emphasizing that reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities must function as a horizontal reservation. This means it should cut across all social categories, including unreserved, Scheduled Caste, and Scheduled Tribe groups. Candidates should first be selected strictly based on merit, and only then adjusted within their respective social categories.
In its observations, the court pointed out that the recruitment authorities had prematurely earmarked posts for disabled candidates within vertical categories before completing the selection process. This approach, it held, undermined merit-based selection and deprived deserving candidates of rightful appointments.
The judgment further highlighted procedural flaws in the Group C recruitment process. It noted that vacancies across different cadres were combined to calculate the four percent disability quota, despite each cadre having distinct qualifications and requirements. Such clubbing of posts, the court ruled, was inconsistent with established recruitment norms and diluted the fairness of the process.
To address these issues, the court has directed the authorities to redraw the merit lists for Multi Tasking Staff positions. Candidates with benchmark disabilities must now be considered strictly based on the marks they obtained, followed by appropriate adjustment within reservation categories. For Group C posts, the state has been instructed to determine the number of reserved positions separately for each cadre and publish fresh, post-wise selection lists.
The ruling also provides clarity on the fate of candidates who have already been appointed. If, during the revised exercise, any previously selected candidate is found ineligible, the state government has been granted the authority to cancel such appointments. However, this must be done in accordance with due legal procedure, ensuring fairness and transparency.
Importantly, the court has set a strict timeline for compliance. The entire प्रक्रिया of revising the selection lists and implementing the corrected reservation framework must be completed within four months from the date the judgment is received. This deadline underscores the urgency of rectifying the recruitment process and restoring confidence among aspirants.
| Also Read: CM assures safety as Tripura schools stay open during rains |
The verdict is expected to have broader implications for public recruitment practices, not only in Tripura but potentially in other states as well. It reinforces the principle that reservation policies must be implemented in a manner that balances social justice with meritocracy. By reaffirming the horizontal nature of disability reservation, the court has provided a clear guideline for future recruitment exercises.
For thousands of candidates affected by the disputed selections, the ruling offers a renewed opportunity for fair consideration. At the same time, it places a significant administrative responsibility on the state government and recruitment authorities to ensure strict adherence to legal standards moving forward.
