GS Paper - 2 (Polity)

The Supreme Court on 21 January 2022 refused to hear a petition seeking to quash the UPSC Civil Services Examination 2020 final selection list to the extent that it violates the 50 per cent ceiling of reservation. A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai refused to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner, Nitish Shankar, a candidate who appeared in the 2020 civil services exam.


  1. The court also warned the petitioner's lawyer that it will dismiss it with a cost and said that the court did not see any point to hear the counsel any further.
  2. The court also remarked that the right to hearing also comes with some restrictions and suggested the petitioner lawyer not advise people to file such kinds of petitions.
  3. The bench noted that the EWS reservation was introduced as per the 103rd Constitutional Amendment and the matter related to this was referred to a larger bench.
  4. The petitioner's counsel urged his petition to be tagged along with the petitions relating to the EWS quota before the larger judge bench but could not convince the bench. Thereafter the petitioner's counsel withdrew the petition with liberty to approach the High Court.
  5. The petitioner claimed that he is a meritorious candidate who has been denied equal opportunity of being considered for selection in the Union Public Service Commission - Civil Services Examination 2020 (UPSC-CSE-2020).
  6. The petitioner has also sought to publish an additional list of candidates considering the petitioner's case for personal interview and recommend additional general category meritorious students against 418 (50 per cent of total vacancy) seats advertised.
  7. According to the petition, the Respondents have recommended 34.55 percent candidates for appointment against the general category and 65.44 per cent against the reserved category, completely sabotaging the merit of the general category candidates.
  8. Only 40 per cent of seats have been marked for appointment against the general unreserved quota, which is in violation of the 50 per cent ceiling of reservation, the petitioner said.