We are a group of friends with similar objective towards avoiding loss of seats/jobs to open category candidates due to an anomoly in application of Reservation rules in selections to professional courses and jobs.
We have filed a case in State High Court but the case is being tabled and not coming up for hearing.
We decided to move the issue to Supreme Court. Can we find suitable advocates to argue our case in Supreme Court.
We are looking for advocates who have experience in arguing similar cases previously.
Our case for argument rests on a similar case earlier referred to a constitutional bench in a matter related to UPSC exam, in which the verdict was in favour of open category candidates.
Ref: https://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2010/05/meritorious-reserved-category-candidate.html
i) MRC candidates who avail the benefit of Rule 16 (2) and adjusted in the reserved category should be counted as part of the reserved pool for the purpose of computing the aggregate reservation quotas. The seats vacated by MRC candidates in the General Pool will be offered to General category candidates.
ii) By operation of Rule 16 (2), the reserved status of an MRC candidate is protected so that his/ her better performance does not deny him of the chance to be allotted to a more preferred service.
iii) The amended Rule 16 (2) only seeks to recognize the inter se merit between two classes of candidates i.e. a) meritorious reserved category candidates b) relatively lower ranked reserved category candidates, for the purpose of allocation to the various Civil Services with due regard for the preferences indicated by them.
iv) The reserved category candidates “belonging to OBC, SC/ ST categories” who are selected on merit and placed in the list of General/Unreserved category candidates can choose to migrate to the respective reserved category at the time of allocation of services. Such migration as envisaged by Rule 16 (2) is not inconsistent with Rule 16 (1) or Articles 14, 16 (4) and 335 of the Constitution.
