- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 22675 OF 2024 (S-KSAT) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 22641 OF 2024 (S-KSAT) IN WP No. 22675/2024 BETWEEN: SMT. USHA.S.N., AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, D/O. SRI NARAYANAMURTHY, SONDEKOPPA AMRUTHUR POST AND HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572111. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA SIMHA REDDY D.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, M.S.BUIDING, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, K. R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001. 3. THE SELECTION AND APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), GRADUATE PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT RAMANAGAR-562159. 4. SRI. ASHOKA KUMAR R.P. RANGUPURA VILLAGE, HOREYALA POST, CHAMARAJANAGARA PIN CODE-571313. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; R4 - SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10/07/2024 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.1521/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AND TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED ORDER AS THE SAME ARE UNJUST, ARBITRARY AND CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF LAND AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 IN WP NO.22641/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PAVITHRA G.C., AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, W/O. SRI NAVEENA H.S.D. HOSALLI VILLAGE, MARALIGA POST, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571419 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA SIMHA REDDY D.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, M.S.BUIDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, K. R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001. 3. THE SELECTION AND APPOINTING AUTHORITY FOR GRADUATE PRIMARY SCHOOL EDUCATION AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT RAMANAGAR-562159 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 4. SRI. RAKSHITH M.S. NO.158, 5TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN ROAD, ANNAPOORNESHWARINAGAR, NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560091. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. P.V.MANJUNATHA, ADV. FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.07.2024 PASSED IN A.No-1596/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AND TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED ORDER AS THE SAME ARE UNJUST ARBITRARY AND CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF LAND AND ETC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The above two writ petitions are filed by two unsuccessful candidates challenging the order dated 10.07.2024 in Application No.1521/2024 and order dated 19.07.2024 in Application No.1596/2024 rejecting their prayer to quash Endorsement dated 06.03.2023 (Annexure-A15) and order of appointment of respondent No.4 in both the writ petitions and to direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider the candidature of petitioners for selection and appointment as Graduate Primary School Teachers in Biological Science (Kannada Medium) under 3A and 3B female/women category respectively. 2. Brief facts of the case are that under Recruitment Notification dated 21.03.2022, respondent No.3 invited applications from eligible candidates to fill up various posts of primary school graduate teachers in various subjects. Both the petitioners applied for the post of Graduate Primary School Teacher in the subject of Biological Science (Kannada Medium) whereunder 37 posts were notified and one post each was earmarked for 3A and 3B category. The above stated - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 Recruitment Notification was issued in terms of Karnataka Education Department Services (Department of Public Instructions) (Recruitment) (Special) Rules, 2022 (for short 'Special Recruitment Rules, 2022'), whereunder not less than 50% of the vacancies shall be filled up by women candidates in each category. 3. Respondent No.3 published Annexure-A11, the Provisional List of candidates dated 18.11.2022 for the post of Graduate Primary School Teachers (Biological Science - Kannada Medium) and as they were not selected, filed their objection stating that as one post each in 3A and 3B category is earmarked, both posts shall be filled up by female candidates in terms of the 50% reservation provided for women candidates under Special Recruitment Rules, 2022. 4. Respondent No.3 published one more Provisional List of Candidates on 27.02.2023 and the petitioners said to have filed one more objection to the said List. Thereafter, respondent No.3 published Main Selection List of Candidates selected for the post of Graduate Primary School Teachers for 6-8 classes for the year 2022 in Biological Science (Kannada - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 Medium). Though 37 posts were notified, 33 candidates were selected in the above stated subject, out of 33 selected candidates, 24 were female/women candidates. Against one post earmarked for 3B category and one post earmarked for 3A category, respondent No.4 in both the applications were selected, who were more meritorious than the petitioners. 5. Aggrieved by the non-selection of the petitioners, the petitioners approached the Tribunal in the above stated two separate applications and the Tribunal under impugned orders rejected their applications holding that when single post is notified, reservation would have no application and further observing that the petitioners have not questioned the Recruitment Notification and that having participated in the selection process, they have no locus to challenge the selection. Questioning the orders passed by the Tribunal, the petitioners are before this Court in these writ petitions. 6. Heard Sri. D.V.Vijaya Simha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Vikas Rojipura, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 in both the writ petitions as well as learned counsel Sri. P.V.Manjunatha, - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 learned counsel for respondent No.4 in W.P.No.22641/2024. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 7. Learned counsel Sri. Vijaya Simha Reddy for the petitioners vehemently contends that since the Special Recruitment Rules, 2022 as well as Recruitment Notification dated 21.03.2022 provides for reservation of 50% for women/female candidates, one post earmarked for 3A category as well as 3B category, ought to have been filled up preferring the petitioners. When only one post is earmarked in each category, preference ought to have been provided to the petitioners. Learned counsel would further submit that non- selection of petitioners is in violation of Special Recruitment Rules, 2022 and he submits that when Rule-7 of Special Recruitment Rules, 2022 would state that reservation for women shall be in each category, the petitioners ought to have been selected in 3A and 3B category respectively providing first preference to the women candidates. In support of his contention, learned counsel would place reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER vs. SANDEEP - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 CHOUDHARY AND OTHERS reported in (2022) 11 SCC 779 and also on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of RAJESH KUMAR DARIA vs. RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND OTHERS reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785. Thus, he would pray for allowing the writ petitions. 8. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate contends that though special reservation is provided to women/female candidates in each category, out of 33 candidates selected for the post of Primary School Teachers in Biological Science subject (Kannada Medium) more than 50% female/women candidates have been selected for appointment. Out of 33 selected candidates, 24 candidates belong to female/woman and over all more than 50% reservation is achieved. Therefore, there is compliance with the Special Reservation of 50% provided to women candidates under Special Recruitment Rules, 2022. Learned AGA would also submit that respondent No.4 in both writ petitions are more meritorious than the petitioners. As such, the petitioners cannot claim that their case ought to have been considered for appointment as Primary School Teachers in Biological Science - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 subject (Kannada Medium). Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the writ petitions. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioners have not made out any ground to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal rejecting their prayer. However, we observe that the observation of the Tribunal that when there is only one post, reservation would have no application in the facts and circumstances not proper and correct. Totally there were 37 posts and classification of vacancy notified for the said 37 posts, reads as follows: «µÀAiÀÄ: fêÀ ಾನ ಾನ ಾನ ಾನ (PÀ£ÀßqÀ ªÀiÁzsÀåªÀÄ) 2021-22£Éà ¸Á°£À ¥ÀzsÀ«ÃzsÀgÀ ¥ÁæxÀ«ÄPÀ ²PÀëPÀgÀ (6-8) £ÉÃgÀ £ÉêÀÄPÁwUÁV gÉÆøÀÖgï »A¢£À ¸Á°£À G½PÉ ¥ÀæPÀnvÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼ÀÄ MlÄÖ ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæªÀUÀðªÁgÀÄ «ÄøÀ1Áw ªÀVÃðPÀgÀt, ªÀVÃðPÀgÀt ¥À.eÁw ¥À.¥ÀAUÀqÀ ¥ÀæªÀUÀð-1 2J 2© 2J 3© ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå MlÄÖ 1 EvÀgÉ 03 01 02 03 02 01 01 09 22 2 UÁæ«ÄÃt C¨sÀåyð 02 0 0 02 0 0 0 05 09 3 PÀ.ªÀiÁ.C¨sÀåyð 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 4 AiÉÆÃ.¤gÁ.C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 5 ªÀiÁf ¸ÉʤPÀ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 6 CAUÀ«PÀ® 01 0 0 01 0 0 0 01 03 37 7 vÀÈwÃAiÀÄ °AUÀzÀ C¨sÀåyð 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 37 MlÄÖ 06 01 02 06 02 01 01 18 37 «.¸ÀÆ:- CAUÀ«®PÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼À°è ¥À.eÁ.01 ºÀÄzÉÝAiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÀ馅 ªÀiÁAzÀå C¨sÀåyðUÉ, 2J 01 ºÀÄzÉÝAiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÀ馅 ªÀiÁAzÀå C¨sÀåyðUÉ, ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå 01 ºÀÄzÉÝAiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÀ馅 ªÀiÁAzÀå C¨sÀåyðUÉ «ÄøÀ°j¹zÉ. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 10. In terms of the above classification of vacancies, one post each is earmarked for 3A and 3B category. Under horizontal reservation, no post is earmarked for women since Cadre and Recruitment Rules and Notification itself provides for 50% reservation for women. In the instant case, as noticed from the Main Selection List of candidates dated 08.03.2023 (Annexure-A16), out of 33 candidates selected, 24 candidates belong to women/female. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the special reservation of 50% of the vacancies to be filled up by women candidates in each category is achieved. If there were more than one post in category 3A and 3B, then the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners could have been appreciated. When only one post is available for the above two categories, no preference is available under the Recruitment Rules or in the Recruitment Notification for women. It is an admitted fact that respondent No.4 in both the writ petitions are more meritorious than the petitioners. 11. The petitioners place reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER (supra) and also on the decision in - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 the case of RAJESH KUMAR DARIA (supra) and those decisions would not assist the petitioners in any way, in the facts and circumstances. In the case of RAJESH KUMAR DARIA, the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down the principles to be applied when special reservation for woman to be applied, Paragraph Nos.8, 9, 10 and 11 reads as follows: "8. We may also refer to two related aspects before considering the facts of this case. The first is about the description of horizontal reservation. For example, if there are 200 vacancies and 15% is the vertical reservation for SC and 30% is the horizontal reservation for women, the proper description of the number of posts reserved for SC, should be: "For SC: 30 posts, of which 9 posts are for women." We find that many a time this is wrongly described thus: "For SC: 21 posts for men and 9 posts for women, in all 30 posts." Obviously, there is, and there can be, no reservation category of "male" or "men". 9. The second relates to the difference between the nature of vertical reservation and horizontal reservation. Social reservations in favour of SC, ST and OBC under Article 16(4) are "vertical reservations". Special reservations in favour of physically handicapped, women, etc., under Articles 16(1) or 15(3) are "horizontal reservations". Where a vertical reservation is made in favour of a Backward Class under Article 16(4), the candidates belonging to such Backward Class, may - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 compete for non-reserved posts and if they are appointed to the non-reserved posts on their own merit, their number will not be counted against the quota reserved for respective Backward Class. Therefore, if the number of SC candidates, who by their own merit, get selected to open competition vacancies, equals or even exceeds the percentage of posts reserved for SC candidates, it cannot be said that the reservation quota for SCs has been filled. The entire reservation quota will be intact and available in addition to those selected under open competition category. (Vide Indra Sawhney1, R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab3, Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan4 and Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul5.) But the aforesaid principle applicable to vertical (social) reservations will not apply to horizontal (special) reservations. Where a special reservation for women is provided within the social reservation for Scheduled Castes, the proper procedure is first to fill up the quota for Scheduled Castes in order of merit and then find out the number of candidates among them who belong to the special reservation group of "Scheduled Caste women". If the number of women in such list is equal to or more than the number of special reservation quota, then there is no need for further selection towards the special reservation quota. Only if there is any shortfall, the requisite number of Scheduled Caste women shall have to be taken by deleting the corresponding number of candidates from the bottom of the list relating to Scheduled Castes. To this extent, horizontal (special) reservation differs from vertical (social) reservation. Thus women selected on - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 merit within the vertical reservation quota will be counted against the horizontal reservation for women. Let us illustrate by an example: If 19 posts are reserved for SCs (of which the quota for women is four), 19 SC candidates shall have to be first listed in accordance with merit, from out of the successful eligible candidates. If such list of 19 candidates contains four SC woman candidates, then there is no need to disturb the list by including any further SC woman candidate. On the other hand, if the list of 19 SC candidates contains only two woman candidates, then the next two SC woman candidates in accordance with merit, will have to be included in the list and corresponding number of candidates from the bottom of such list shall have to be deleted, so as to ensure that the final 19 selected SC candidates contain four woman SC candidates. (But if the list of 19 SC candidates contains more than four woman candidates, selected on own merit, all of them will continue in the list and there is no question of deleting the excess woman candidates on the ground that "SC women" have been selected in excess of the prescribed internal quota of four.) 10. In this case, the number of candidates to be selected under general category (open competition), were 59, out of which 11 were earmarked for women. When the first 59 from among the 261 successful candidates - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 were taken and listed as per merit, it contained 11 woman candidates, which was equal to the quota for "general category women". There was thus no need for any further selection of woman candidates under the special reservation for women. But what RPSC did was to take only the first 48 candidates in the order of merit (which contained 11 women) and thereafter, fill the next 11 posts under the general category with woman candidates. As a result, we find that among 59 general category candidates in all 22 women have been selected consisting of eleven woman candidates selected on their own merit (candidates at Sl. Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 19, 21, 25, 31, 35 and 41 of the selection list) and another eleven (candidates at Sl. Nos. 54, 61, 62, 63, 66, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79 and 80 of the selection list) included under reservation quota for "general category women". This is clearly impermissible. The process of selections made by RPSC amounts to treating the 20% reservation for women as a vertical reservation, instead of being a horizontal reservation within the vertical reservation. 11. Similarly, we find that in regard to 24 posts for OBC, 19 candidates were selected by RPSC in accordance with merit from among OBC candidates which included three woman candidates. Thereafter, another five women were selected under the category of "OBC women", instead of adding only two which was the shortfall. Thus there were in all 8 women candidates among the 24 OBC candidates found in the selection list. The proper course was to list 24 OBC candidates as per the merit and then - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6225-DB WP No. 22675 of 2024 C/W WP No. 22641 of 2024 find out number of woman candidates among them, and only fill the shortfall to make up the quota of five for women." The above decision would make it clear that if the number of woman in a select list is equal to or more than the number of special reservation quota i.e., woman, then there is no need for further selection for the special reservation quota. 12. When the above principle is applied in the instant selection process, out of 33 selected candidates, there are 24 woman candidates. In other words more than 50% women candidates have selected and more than 50% women reservation is achieved. As such, we reject the contention of the petitioners that the petitioners ought to have given preference. There is no merit in any of the contentions of the petitioners and accordingly, writ petitions stand rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE SMJ; List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12