I. M. QUDDUSI, J. ( 1 ) AT the very out set it may be mentioned that this matter had already been heard once and on the mention of the learned Counsel for the parties it was re-heard. ( 2 ) THE present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Dr. Ram Sukh Yadav in which he prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint him on the post of Alopathic Medical Officer in Provincial Medical and health Service Cadre in pursuance of the advertisement published on 21st December, 1991 by the Public Service Commission, Uttar Pradesh, respondent No. 2 and interview held on 10-8-1993. ( 3 ) THE undisputed facts of the case are that applications were invited by respondent No. 2 from the eligible qualified candidates through an advertisement dated 21st December, 1991 for the recruitment on 2044 posts of the Medical Officers (male) in the P. M. H. S. Cadre of Uttar pradesh, Qualifications which were prescribed under the aforesaid advertisement were a M. B. B. S. or equivalent degree with one year rotatory internship training. Out of 2044 posts, 306 posts were reserved for backward class candidates. The petitioner, who belongs to backward class category and possessed the minimum requisite qualifications also applied for the same. The applications of 290 candidates of backward class category were received by the commission out of which only 273 candidates were called for interview. The commission found only 206 candidates suitable from the backward class category. Consequently, it recommended only those 206 candidates for appointment. The name of the petitioner did not find place in the list of those 206 successful candidates. ( 4 ) COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT as well as a supplementary counter-affidavit were filed on behalf of the U. P. Public Service Commission to which rejoinder-affidavit and a supplementary rejoinder-affidavit respectively have been filed by the petitioner. ( 5 ) WE have heard at length Sri C. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. M. Sahai, learned counsel appearing for the U. P. Public Service Commission. ( 6 ) SRI C. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed this writ petition on two grounds. ( 5 ) WE have heard at length Sri C. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. M. Sahai, learned counsel appearing for the U. P. Public Service Commission. ( 6 ) SRI C. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed this writ petition on two grounds. His first contention is that the advertisement to fill up 306 posts from the backward class category was made against which only 290 candidates applied and only 273 candidates were called for interview and, as such, when the number of candidates were lesser than the number of vacancies advertised, all of them are entitled to be selected and appointed if they possessed the minimum prescribed qualifications and the commission has no right to reject the petitioner on the ground of unsuitability. In support of his contention he also placed reliance on a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4713 of 1987-Vinod Prakash singh v. U. P. Slate Electricity Board, decided on 16-5-1988. ( 7 ) THE second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the provisions of Article 320 (4) of the Constitution, nothing is required to be consulted from the Public Service commission in respect of the manner in which the recruitment of backward class citizens and, as such, the recruitment of backward class citizens has been ousted from the purview of the Public service Commission. ( 8 ) SHRI V. M. Sahai, learned counsel for the commission has argued that the criteria suggested by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be permitted because the commission has to choose from amongst the persons having minimum qualifications for the post. It has been argued that the commission has fixed criteria for picking up suitable candidates from amongst those who are having minimum prescribed qualification It was pointed out that the petitioner had secured only 23 marks in the interview whereas others in his group had obtained 54, 64, 53, 44, 51, 50, 47, 51, 44, 46 and 51 while another person had obtained 24 marks. It has been argued by Sri Sahai that the petitioners scoring in the academic examination was less than 40 per cent and, therefore, according to the standard fixed by the Public Service Commission, such a candidate was not fit to be absorbed in Provincial Medical Service Cadre. It has been argued by Sri Sahai that the petitioners scoring in the academic examination was less than 40 per cent and, therefore, according to the standard fixed by the Public Service Commission, such a candidate was not fit to be absorbed in Provincial Medical Service Cadre. He has drawn our attention towards a resolution of the U. P. Public Service Commission dated 24th December, 1966 contained in annexure 2 to the supplementary counter-affidavit by which the minimum standard of efficiency has been fixed to the extent of 40 per cent marks that may be secured by a candidate out of the aggregate marks of interview and written papers. ( 9 ) HE has further submitted that Article 320 (4) of the Constitution does not exclude the jurisdiction of Public Service Commission in respect of recruitment of backward class citizens. ( 10 ) IN the matter of Vinod Prakash Singh (supra) no such written examination like the instant case was held and the selection was made on the basis of interview alone. Moreover, in that case no rules or norms fixed by the Public Service Commission in respect of prescribing the minimum standard of efficiency of the candidates were shown. But in the instant case the respondents have filed the decision of the commission by which the minimum standard of efficiency has been fixed. Thus, the decision in the case of Vinod Prakash Singh (supra) is of no help to the petitioner. ( 11 ) IN the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rafiquddin, AIR 1988 SC 162 , the Honble supreme Court has held that the viva voce test is a well recognised method of judging the suitability of a candidate for appointment to public services. ( 12 ) IN the matter of Mehmood Alam Tariq v. State of Rajasthan, 1988 (3) SCC 241 , the Honble supreme Court has further held that there should be a search for the best talent particularly in relation to higher posts. However, as to the methods of assessment of efficiency, promise and aptitude, ideas and policies widely vary, though it has now come to be accepted that selection is an informal professional exercise and it is best to be left to agencies independent of the services to which recruitment is made. However, as to the methods of assessment of efficiency, promise and aptitude, ideas and policies widely vary, though it has now come to be accepted that selection is an informal professional exercise and it is best to be left to agencies independent of the services to which recruitment is made. The interview is now an accepted aid to selection and is designed to give the selectors some evidence of the personality and character of the candidate. ( 13 ) IN the matter in question although number of applicants belonging to backward class category was lesser than the number of vacancies reserved for them, but their suitability could not be ascertained without calling them for interview as the Public Service Commission had no other occasion to judge the suitability of the candidates. The criteria of interview was an essential part of the process of selection to judge the qualities of the candidates necessary and useful for appointment is a public servant also. Thus, the case of Vinod Kumar Singh (supra) is of no help to the petitioner. ( 14 ) WITH regard to the second contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner it is necessary to peruse the provisions of Article 320 of the Constitution which are reproduced below : "320. (1) It shall be the duty of the Union and the State Public Service Commission to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and the services of the State respectively. (2) It shall also be the duty of the Union Public Service Commission, if requested by any two or more States so to do, to assist those States in framing and operating schemes of joint recruitment for any services for which candidates possessing special qualifications are required. (2) It shall also be the duty of the Union Public Service Commission, if requested by any two or more States so to do, to assist those States in framing and operating schemes of joint recruitment for any services for which candidates possessing special qualifications are required. (3) The Union Public Service Commission of the State Public Service Commission, as the case may be, shall be consulted : (a) on all matters relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and for civil posts; (b) on the principles to be followed in making appointments to civil services and posts and in making promotions and transfers from one service to another and on the suitability of candidates for such appointments, promotions or transfers; (c) on all disciplinary matters affecting a person serving under the Government of India or the government of a State in a civil capacity, including memorials or petitions relating to such matters; (d) on any claim by or in respect of a person who is serving or has served under the Government of India or the Government of a State or under the Crown in India or under the Government of an indian State, in a civil capacity, that any costs incurred by him in defending legal proceedings instituted against him in respect of acts done or purporting to be done in the execution of his duty should be paid out of the consolidated fund of India, or, as the case may be, out of the consolidated Fund of the State; (e) on any claim for the award of a pension in respect of injuries sustained by a person while serving under the Government of India or the Government of a State or under the Crown in India or under the Government of an Indian State, In a civil capacity and any question as to the amount of any such award, and it shall be the duty of a Public Service Commission to advice on any matter so referred to them and on any other matter which the President, or as the case may be, the Governor. . . . . . . . . . . . of the State, may refer to them : provided that the President as respects the All-India services and also as respects other services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union, and the Governor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of the State, may refer to them : provided that the President as respects the All-India services and also as respects other services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union, and the Governor. . . . . . . . as respects other services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State, may make regulations specifying the matters in which either generally, or in any particular class of case or in any particular circumstances, it shall not be necessary for a Public Service Commission to be consulted. (4) Nothing in Clause (3) shall require a Public Service Commission to be consulted as respects the manner in which any provisions referred to in Clause (4) of Article 16 may be made or as respects the manner in which effect may be given to the provisions of Article 335. (5) All regulations made under the proviso to Clause (3) by the President of the Governor. . . . . . . . . of a State shall be laid for not less than fourteen days before each House of Parliament or the House or each House of the Legislature of the State, as the case may be, as soon as possible after they are made, and shall be subject to such modifications, whether by way of repeal or amendment. as both Houses of Parliament or the both Houses of the Legislature of the State may make during the session in which they are so laid. " it is necessary to peruse the provisions of Clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution. Article 16 of the Constitution is quoted below : "16. (1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State. (1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State. (3) Nothing in this article shall prevent Parliament from making any law prescribing, in regard to a class or classes of employment or appointment to an office under the Government of, or any local or other authority within, a State or Union territory, any requirement as to residence within that State or Union territory, prior to such employment or appointment. (4) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provisions for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the state, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. (5) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any law which provides that the incumbent of an office is connection with the affairs of any religious or denominational institution or any member of the governing body thereof shall be a person professing a particular religion or belonging to a particular denomination. " clause (4) of Article 16 is exhaustive of the provisions that can be made in favour of the backward classes in the matter of employment. Therefore, where the State finds it necessary for the purpose of giving full effect to the provisions of reservation to provide certain exemptions, concessions or preferences to members of backward classes, it can extend the same under Clause (4) itself. In other words, all supplemental and ancillary provisions to ensure full advantage of provisions for reservation can be provided as part of concept of reservation itself. In this sense, clause (4) of Article 16 is exhaustive of the special provisions that can be made in favour of "the backward class of citizens. In other words, all supplemental and ancillary provisions to ensure full advantage of provisions for reservation can be provided as part of concept of reservation itself. In this sense, clause (4) of Article 16 is exhaustive of the special provisions that can be made in favour of "the backward class of citizens. " ( 15 ) RESERVATION is the highest form of special provision, while preference, concession and exemption are lesser forms, under the constitutional scheme and context of Article 16 (4) the larger concept of reservations takes within its sweep all supplemental and ancillary provisions as also lesser types of special provisions like exemptions, concessions and relaxations, consistent no doubt with the requirement of maintenance of efficiency of administration the admonition of article 235. Here the words "any provisions for the reservation of appointments and posts" assume significance. The word "any" and the associated words must be given their due meaning. They are not a mere surplusage. ( 16 ) BACKWARD classes having been classified by the Constitution itself as a class deserving special treatment and the Constitution having itself specified the nature of special treatment, it should be presumed that no further classification or special treatment is permissible in their favour apart from or outside the Clause (4) of Article 16. ( 17 ) CLAUSE (4) of Article 16 is not an exception to Articles 16 (1) and (2) but it is an enabling provision and permissive in character overriding Articles 16 (1) and (2) ; that it is a source of reservation for appointments or posts in the services so far as the backward class of citizens is concerned and that under Clause (1) of Article 16 reservation for appointments or posts can be made to other sections of the society such as physically handicapped etc. Article 16 (4) is exhaustive of all the reservations that can be made in favour of backward class of citizens. No reservation can be made under Article 16 (4) for classes other than backward classes. ( 18 ) THERE is complete unanimity of judicial opinion of Supreme Court that under Article 16 (4)the State can make adequate provisions for reservations of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens if in the opinion of the State such backward class is not adequately represented in the State. ( 18 ) THERE is complete unanimity of judicial opinion of Supreme Court that under Article 16 (4)the State can make adequate provisions for reservations of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens if in the opinion of the State such backward class is not adequately represented in the State. ( 19 ) THE Constituent Assembly of India met in (he Constitution Hall, New Delhi and Dr B. R. Ambedkar moved the Article 286 (now Article 3?0) before the House, on that occasion Pt. Hirday Nath Kunzure had remarked that: "steps can be taken to see that the interests of low community are ignored ; but it will be most undesirable to require the executive to lay down that every class shall be represented in the services according to its numerical strength. We all know that education is not widely spread in this country. There is, therefore, a large majority of people who are uneducated. Can we, seriously speaking, ask in this State of things, that all the classes should be represented in accordance with their population ? If it were a question of representation in the Legislature, this argument would have force, But where important business of the State requiring knowledge and judgment has to be carried on from day to day, we should appoint people only on the ground of merit. We cannot appoint them merely on the ground that their appointment will give satisfaction to certain classes, for if that were done, the very classes that want an adequate share in the public services would be the first to suffer, for they have to gain more by the administration and the impartiality of the officers then the members of the more advanced classes" dr. B. R. Ambedkar in his speech observed that : ". . . . . . . . . there is no fear that the interest of the backward classes or the Scheduled Castes will be overlooked in the recruitment to the services. As my friend Pandit Kunzure has said, the article I have presented to the house ere certainly a very great improvement upon what the article before in the Draft Constitution. . . . . . . there is no fear that the interest of the backward classes or the Scheduled Castes will be overlooked in the recruitment to the services. As my friend Pandit Kunzure has said, the article I have presented to the house ere certainly a very great improvement upon what the article before in the Draft Constitution. We have, if I may say so for myself, studied a great deal the provisions in the Canadian law and the provisions in the Australian law, and we have succeeded, if I may say so, in finding out a via media which I hope the House will not find any difficulty in accepting. " In view of the above discussions, it is clear that Article 16 (4) only covers reservation for appointments in favour of backward class citizens and not the matter relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and for civil post and thus even in the appointments of backward class citizens the Public Service Commission has to be consulted. ( 20 ) IN the matter of Union of India v. Chotla, AIR 1978 SC 1214 , it has been held that consultation would be mandatory when the word shall is used in a Rule or Regulation made by the Government e. g. Regulation 5 (2) of the Indian Forests Service (Initial Recruitment)Regulations, 1966. ( 21 ) IT is well-settled law laid down by the Supreme Court that even if adequate number of candidates ere found fit, the successful candidate do not acquire any indefeasible right to be appointed against the existing vacancies. Some of the authorities in this regard are Jitendra kumar v. State of Punjab, AIR 1984 SC 1850 and Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India, 1991 (3)SCC 47 . ( 22 ) IN view of the above discussion the Public Service Commission cannot be directed to declare the petitioner suitable for appointment once the petitioner was found not suitable as per the norms fixed by the commission. In the circumstances of the case both the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner being not sustainable, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. ( 23 ) IN the result the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. .