"Vertical Reservation" & "Horizontal Reservation" Explained Based On Supreme Court Judgments

There are two types of mechanisms used for providing the benefit of reservations to the reserved classes i.e., Vertical Reservation and Horizontal Reservation.

Explaining the concept of Vertical and Horizontal Reservation, the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney's case held that when a reservation is made in favor of Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and other backward classes (OBCs) under Article 16(4), it may be called as vertical reservations whereas when a reservation is made in favor of special category such woman, persons with disability, etc. under Article 16(1), then it may be called as a horizontal reservation.

In other words, the Social reservations in favor of SC, ST, and OBC under Article 16(4) are “vertical reservations”. Special reservations in favour of physically handicapped persons, women, etc. under Articles 16(1) or 15(3) are “horizontal reservations” which cut across vertically to provide reservations to certain special categories.

The Court in Indra Sawhney said that, unlike vertical reservation where out of the total seats, a certain number of seats is fixed for each category, in horizontal reservation, a certain number of seats are fixed from the total seats for a special category like women, PWD, etc. which becomes inter-transferable amongst the categories mentioned vertically.

“Suppose 3% of the vacancies are reserved in favour of physically handicapped persons (being a horizontal reservation); this would be a reservation relatable to clause (1) of Article 16. The persons selected against this quota will be placed in the appropriate category; if he belongs to SC category he will be placed in that quota by making necessary adjustments; similarly, if he belongs to open competition (OC) category, he will be placed in that category by making necessary adjustments. Even after providing for these horizontal reservations, the percentage of reservations in favour of backward class of citizens remains — and should remain — the same.”, the court explained in Indra Sawhney.

How Vertical Reservation Works?

In the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785, the Supreme Court explained the working of the vertical reservation.

The Court said that if the person belonging to the reserved category is eligible to be appointed in the open category then his number will not be counted against the quota reserved for the respective Class.

For example, 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 Court clarified that the aforesaid mechanism would only work for the vertical reservation and not for the horizontal reservation.

“Where a special reservation for women (horizontal) 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 merit within the vertical reservation quota will be counted against the horizontal reservation for women.”, the court clarified.

The mode of working of the vertical reservation can be understood better with an example:

Suppose there are 10 posts reserved for SC candidates, with a quota of 2 for SC women. First, 10 SC candidates must be selected based on merit from the eligible pool. If this list includes 2 SC women, no further changes are needed. However, if the list includes only 1 SC woman, an additional SC woman must be included based on merit. To accommodate this, candidates from the bottom of the list will be removed, ensuring that the final selection of 10 SC candidates includes 2 SC women.

Now, the question appears what if the list of 10 SC candidates contains more than two women candidates, selected on their own merit, will they continue in the list? The court answered that all of them would continue on the list and there was no question of deleting the excess woman candidates on the ground that “SC women” had been selected in excess of the prescribed internal quota of two.

How Horizontal Reservation Works?

As stated the main beneficiaries of the horizontal reservation are women, PWD, transgender community, veterans, etc where a certain number of seats are reserved for them out of the total seats. In horizontal reservation there's no bifurcation amongst the different classes rather the candidates selected from the special category will be placed in their class i.e. if he/she belongs to the Scheduled Category, he/she will be placed in that category by making necessary adjustments, and if he/she belongs to open category, necessary adjustments will be made in the open category.

In a recent case of Rekha Sharma Versus The Rajasthan High Court, the Court explained that Horizontal Reservation is of two types: - (i) Compartmentalised Horizontal Reservation, and (ii) Overall Horizontal Reservation.

The Compartmentalised Horizontal Reservation is such wherein the proportionate vacancies are reserved in each vertical reserved category. However, in the case of Overall Horizontal Reservation, the Reservation is provided on the total post advertised i.e. such reservation is not specific to each vertical category.

The difference between the two can be better understood by way of an illustration:

Suppose out of the 50 total seats 10 seats are to be reserved for woman candidates, if the 10 seats are bifurcated amongst the different classes such as 4 for SCs, 4 for STs, and 2 for OBCs, then such a mechanism of seat fixation is called compartmentalized horizontal reservation. Whereas, when the 10 seats that ought to be reserved for woman candidates are not specific to each vertical category, then it is called an Overall Horizontal Reservation.

In other words, in an advertisement when the vacancies in the case of women candidates were classified/identified for each category i.e. General, OBC, SC, ST, MBC then it would be called compartmentalization whereas if the vacancies are reserved for the Persons with benchmark disabilities than it would be called as an overall reservation.

The Court in Rekha Sharma's case drew reference to the case of Anil Kumar Gupta and Others vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in (1995) 5 SCC 173 and observed as follows:

“It has been observed therein (Anil Kumar Gupta) that where the seats reserved for the Horizontal Reservations are proportionately divided amongst the Vertical (Social) Reservations and are not intertransferable, it would be a case of Compartmentalised Reservations, whereas in the Overall Reservation, while allocating the special reservation candidates to their respective social reservation category, the Overall Reservation in favour of special reservation categories has to be honoured. Meaning thereby the special reservations cannot be proportionately divided among the Vertical (Social) reservation categories, and the candidates eligible for special reservation categories have to be provided overall seats reserved for them, either by adjusting them against any of the Social/Vertical reservations or otherwise, and thus they are intertransferable.”

In the recent judgment in Ramnaresh @ Rinku Kuswah v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Court held that a meritorious reserved category candidate who is entitled to the General category of the said horizontal reservation on his own merit, will have to be allotted a seat from the said General category of the horizontal reservation. Meaning thereby such a candidate cannot be counted in a horizontal seat reserved for the category of vertical reservation like SC/ST., the court said.  Placing reliance on the case of Saurav Yadav and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, the bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan observed that the candidates from the reserved categories like SC/ST/OBC, if they are entitled on their own merit in the UR quota, will have to be admitted against the UR quota.