(a) whether 97 candidates belonging to the OBC category
finally cleared the Civil Services Examination conducted by the
Union Public Service Commission;
(b) if so, whether the selection of 47 candidates of the OBC
category out of 97 candidates have been cancelled; and
(c) if so, the reasons therefor along with the guidelines
issued by the Government in this regard?
MINISTER OF STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING AND
DEPARTMENT OF PENSION AND PENSIONERS` WELFARE IN THE MINISTRY OF
PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS
(SMT. VASUNDHARA RAJE)
(a), (b) & (c): A statement is placed on the Table of the House.
STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN PARTS (a), (b) and (c) OF LOK SABHA
UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 4038 SLATED FOR 19.4.2000 REGARDING UPSC
EXAMS.
(a), (b) & (c) : The Union Public Service Commission
(hereinafter referred to as UPSC) had recommended a total of 215
candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for
appointment on the basis of Civil Services Examination (CSE)
1997. Out of these 215 candidates, 166 candidates had been
recommended by relaxed standards to fill 166 vacancies reserved
for OBCs. The remaining 49 candidates were recommended as part
of general category candidates as they had qualified the CSE-1997
without availing any of the concessions/ relaxations available to
the OBCs.
2. The combined order of merit declared by UPSC forms the basis
of service allocation to 28 different services/posts having
regard to the position in order of merit, order of preference for
the available services, category-wise vacancy, status on medical
fitness and previous employment. In the course of allocation of
service, it was found that out of 49 candidates recommended as
part of the list of the general category candidates, only 2 could
be allocated to a service of their higher preference without
availing the benefit of reservation for purpose of service
allocation and were, as such, adjusted against unreserved
vacancies. The remaining 47 candidates, however, who could be
allocated to the service of their higher preference only through
relaxed standards for purposes of service allocation were given
the benefit of reservation for the purpose of allocation to a
service of their higher preference and, hence were adjusted
against OBC vacancies in that service. As such, there were 213
(166+47) OBC candidates available for allocation to the 166
reserved vacancies for the OBCs. Of these 213 OBC candidates:
(a) 166 OBC candidates were allocated to various services;
(b) 30 OBC candidates were ineligible for allocation as they
either had already accepted allocation to a service on the basis
of an earlier Civil Services Examination and had not qualified
for allocation to services/posts which were higher in the order
of preference as per Rule 18 of the CSE, 1997 Rules, or were
declared physically unfit by Medical Board for appointment;
(c) the remaining 17 OBC candidates could not be allocated to a
service on the basis of CSE-1997 due to non-availability of
vacancy at their turn under the OBC category.
3. The manner of service allocation followed by the Government
is strictly in accordance with the CSE-1997 Rules and ratio laid
down by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Ritesh R. Shah
(JT 1996(2) SC 495); M. Neethi Chandra (1996 6 SCC 36) and Dr.
Anil Kumar (1998 9 SCC 405).