J & K Reservation Rules: Three Percent Defence Personnel Quota Constitutes Overall Horizontal Reservation, Not Compartmentalized One: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar clarified that the three percent reservation for Children of Defence Personnel (CDP) under the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005, constitutes an overall horizontal reservation rather than a compartmentalized one. Observing that such reservation “cuts across the vertical reservation,” the Court held that candidates selected under the CDP quota are to be adjusted within their respective categories. Dismissing a petition by a candidate seeking NEET-UG 2025 admission under the CDP quota, the Court upheld the Board of Professional Entrance Examination’s stand that the female CDP quota was already filled on merit, leaving no basis for readjustment or further allocation of seats.
The petitioner, Ravneet Kour, appeared in NEET-UG 2025 conducted by the National Testing Agency on 4 May 2025 and secured 348 marks, attaining UT rank 3223. She claimed eligibility under the ST-2 category with a further claim under the CDP quota (Priority-IV). According to her petition, the provisional select list issued by BOPEE on 20 August 2025 for MBBS/BDS admissions included candidates with lower priority under the CDP quota in the ST-2 category, while her candidature was overlooked despite a higher priority status. She alleged that this action violated the Ministry of Defence policy dated 21 May 2018, which prescribes that merit applies only within the same priority group under the CDP scheme.
In response, BOPEE submitted that under the three percent horizontal reservation for female candidates in the CDP category, fourteen seats were to be filled. However, during online counselling, twenty-one female CDP candidates had already been allotted MBBS seats and three were allotted BDS seats based on their merit. It was contended that since the prescribed quota was exceeded on the basis of merit, no displacement of candidates was required to accommodate additional claimants under the CDP quota. BOPEE further argued that the mandate of S.O. 277 dated 13 August 2021 had not been ignored, as there was no occasion to apply the inter se priority provisions when the reserved quota had already been fulfilled through merit-based selections.
The Court stated, “The contents of the writ petition are bereft of any details in this regard. The petition on this ground alone deserves to be dismissed.”
The judgment recorded, “There was no occasion for the respondent-BOPEE to consider the priority of the candidates selected under the said quota.” It was also observed that “horizontal reservation cuts across the vertical reservation and the persons selected against CDP quota are to be placed in appropriate category as reservation of three percent (3%) provided to Children of Defence Personnel under the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005 is an overall horizontal reservation and not compartmentalized horizontal reservation.”
The Court referred to a Division Bench decision in Syed Shaifta Arifeen Balkhi v. J&K Public Service Commission & Ors (WP(C) No. 981/2024, decided on 25 October 2024), which elaborated on the concept of horizontal reservation. Quoting from that judgement, Justice Dhar recorded, “Horizontal reservation would cut across the vertical reservation and the persons selected against the physically challenged quota would be placed in the appropriate category. The architectural composition of the Explanation-B appended to Rule 4 amplifies Rule 4, to the extent that the reservation provided to the physically handicapped persons is an overall horizontal reservation.” The same principle, the Court stated, applied to the CDP quota as well.
Accordingly, Justice Dhar clarified that “the three percent (3%) reservation provided to Children of Defence Personnel is an overall horizontal reservation and not compartmentalized horizontal reservation.” The Court elaborated that candidates admitted under the CDP quota are to be placed in their respective vertical categories, such as Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, or Open Merit, based on their classification. Hence, if the quota is fulfilled by candidates qualifying on merit, no further adjustments or displacements are required.
The Court stated, “Once the quota under CDP had already exhausted while allocating seats to female candidates on the basis of the merit obtained by them in the entrance examination, there was no need for the respondent-BOPEE to displace any candidate from any of the categories to make way for a candidate having inferior merit and better priority.”
“The said situation would have arisen only if the number of candidates falling in CDP category, who made the grade on their own merit in their respective category, would not have been sufficient to fill up the seats earmarked for the said quota. The course adopted by the respondent-BOPEE, in these circumstances, is perfectly in accordance with the legal position and no fault can be found with the same.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly.”
Advocates Representing the Parties:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Amullaya Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG with Mr. Kartikay Sharma, Advocate; Mr. Suneel Malhotra, Advocate.
Case Title: Ravneet Kour v. Union of India and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 2453/2025
Bench: Justice Sanjay Dhar
