Candidate from reserved category cannot be shifted to general category: Himachal High Court

January 6, 2026

The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed a petition challenging the recruitment process for Assistant Engineers (Electrical). The court stated that if a candidate from a reserved category has availed of any relaxation (relaxed standards) at any stage of the selection process, they cannot subsequently be adjusted against general category seats.

The Court of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua clarified that it is now a well-established principle of law that reserved category candidates who avail of relaxed standards at any stage, such as age, experience, or cut-off marks, are not eligible to be considered for general category vacancies.

The court noted that, according to the records, the petitioner had availed of the lower cut-off marks prescribed for the EWS category during the screening test. Since she had availed of the category-based relaxation at this stage, she could not subsequently be migrated to the general category seats.

The case pertains to 76 posts of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) advertised by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission in 2022. The petitioner, belonging to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category, had challenged the selection process.

The argument was that another selected candidate should have been shifted to the general category, as their marks were higher than the general category cut-off. The petitioner claimed that if this candidate were moved to the general category, a seat would become vacant in the EWS category, thus ensuring her selection.

Judgment reserved in government employees’ service recruitment case
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has concluded arguments on a petition challenging the Government Employees Recruitment and Service Conditions Bill, 2024. A division bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Ramesh Verma reserved judgment after hearing all parties.

On Monday, the senior advocate appearing for the petitioners countered the government’s arguments, informing the court that the Act is contrary to the provisions enshrined in the Constitution. He urged the court to strike down the Act. Earlier, on Wednesday, the Advocate General had presented his arguments.