Telangana High Court upholds TGPSC’s retrospective application of 33.3% horizontal reservation for women

The dispute stemmed from a notification issued in August 2022 for recruitment to academic posts in the Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu. The petitioner, P V Shalini, secured the first rank in the Computer Science/Information Technology category following interviews conducted in February 2023. However, the final selection list was delayed for over a year.

During this period, the Telangana government issued two orders dated February 10 and February 13, 2024, which formally standardised the methodology for implementation of 33.3 per cent horizontal reservation for women across all categories, in line with the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission.

Shalini contended that applying these new GOs retrospectively, after the marks list was already published, was illegal, arbitrary, and violated her rights under Articles 14, 16, 19(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. She argued that selection should be regulated by the rules existing at the time the process began.

The high court scrutinised the origin of the new GOs and found that the commission was merely adhering to judicial directives.

The court noted that the GOs were issued “only with the directions of this Court in W.P.Nos.38502 and 27844 of 2022 as in the said writ petitions, this Court has issued direction to the respondent Commission to restrict the women reservation to 33 1/3 percentage by following the principle of horizontal reservation within vertical reservation in terms of the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court”.

Justice Rao, citing a Supreme Court precedent, observed that the new policy was issued as a clarification or compliance with existing law, not a complete amendment.

Regarding the necessity of compliance, the bench observed: “The contention of the petitioner cannot be considered, as the authorities have issued the above mentioned two GOs., only with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the said direction was also followed by this Court.”

The court concluded that applying the horizontal reservation principle, which dictates how merit-based selection interacts with special reservation for women, was a matter of correcting an existing legal necessity mandated by higher courts.

Finding no legal error or arbitrariness in the TGPSC’s decision to implement the revised reservation methodology for the ongoing recruitment process, Justice Rao ruled, “Therefore, the same cannot be treated as illegal and arbitrary. Hence, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.”

The petition was consequently dismissed, allowing the TGPSC to proceed with the final selection list under the updated horizontal reservation rules.