Court holds no vested right in reservation category post finality of judgment; participation in selection process without appointment does not confer entitlement
In a significant ruling delivered on August 31, 2026, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Aniruddha Roy, dismissed two writ petitions filed by aspirants who sought to claim rights under the OBC-A reserved category in the ongoing Second State Level Selection Test (SLST), 2025. The petitioners, Mehebuba Khatun and others, as well as Sabina Khatun and others, challenged notifications issued by the Central School Service Commission that effectively disqualified them from claiming reservation benefits based on caste certificates that had been struck down by a prior judicial decision.
The crux of the dispute revolved around the validity and applicability of caste certificates for reserved categories following the landmark Division Bench judgment in Amal Chandra Das v. State of West Bengal (2024 SCC Online Cal 5389), which had struck down certificates of several backward classes, including the “Mondals” category to which petitioners belonged. The State’s Special Leave Petition against this judgment was withdrawn in July 2026, confirming the finality of the decision.
The petitioners had participated in the SLST 2025 under the OBC-A category, relying on their caste certificates, and succeeded in reaching the stage of the final merit list. However, subsequent notifications by the Central School Service Commission mandated that failure to declare valid OBC sub-category details within a stipulated timeframe would result in automatic classification under the Unreserved (General) category. Petitioners contended that their rights as untainted candidates from the previous SLST 2016 selection process, which had been protected under earlier Supreme Court and High Court judgments, entitled them to continue claiming reservation benefits in the current recruitment.
Rejecting these contentions, the High Court emphasized that the prior judicial decision striking down the caste certificates had attained finality, and consequently, petitioners could not claim rights under the reserved categories in the fresh selection process initiated after the judgment. The court further clarified that participation in a selection process does not create a vested right unless an appointment letter has been issued—a principle firmly rooted in service law jurisprudence.
The court distinguished the current facts from earlier decisions that protected untainted candidates in previous selections, noting that the entire SLST 2016 selection process had been set aside by the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) . This nullification extinguished any reservation-based claims flowing from that process. The court also upheld the State’s reservation policy as a policy decision not subject to challenge by the petitioners and held that the adoption of this policy by the Central School Service Commission did not constitute a change in the “rule of the game” during the selection process.
In conclusion, the Calcutta High Court held the petitions to be devoid of merit and dismissed them, affirming that the petitioners have no legal or constitutional right to maintain their claims for reservation benefits post the judicial invalidation of their caste certificates. The court’s ruling reinforces the principle that benefits under reserved categories are contingent on valid caste certificates and that fresh selection processes must be conducted in accordance with extant reservation policies and judicial pronouncements.
Bottom Line:
Candidates cannot claim rights under reserved category after the finality of a judicial decision striking down the reserved categories to which they belong. Participation in a selection process does not create a vested right until the issuance of an appointment letter.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 226, Constitution of India; West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection for Appointment to the Posts of Assistant Teachers for Upper Primary Level) Rules, 2025
Mehebuba Khatun v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2973657
