The high court pointed out that in that case Dalit and backward category students competing on the basis of reservation would be deprived of better cadre and services.

Appearing for the union government, Solicitor General Gopal Subramanian however, contended that if a backward category student qualifying the prestigious civil services on his own merit is not given the benefit of reservation in allocation of services and cadre it would result in an anomaly.

The anomaly would lead to non-meritorious backward category aspirants getting better and higher services compared to their meritorious counterparts.

'It would be anomalous that the government has to take a stand on the matter dealing with two persons of the same class,' said the law officer, adding that 'if you prefer people with lower marks to those with higher marks in the same class, the efficiency in administration, as contemplated under Article 335, would be compromised.'

But, the bench, which also included Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justice R.V. Raveendran, Justice B.S. Reddy and Justice P. Satahsivam, did not appear to appreciate the idea of the same person refusing and availing quota benefits in different circumstances.