Judgment 1. This writ petition by Union of India is directed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench dated 30.08.2005 in Original Application No. 40/2005 allowing the application of Respondent No. 1. The respondent had approached the Tribunal for quashing an order 24.08.2004 by which Staff Selection Commission, Northern Region, Examination-II Unit, Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India had rejected his request to change the category from OBC to General for appointment on the basis of the Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2003-Scheme B, on the ground that the final result of the Examination had been declared. 2. The background facts are that pursuant to the advertisement in August 2003, the respondent applied for appointment. In the application, he mentioned the category as OBC. Case of the petitioners is that his candidature was provisionally entertained and on being successful at the preliminary examination he was permitted to appear at the main examination. At the stage of final scrutiny, it transpired that he belongs to creamy layer section of the OBC. By this time, the respondent had been finally selected for the post of Divisional Accountant. At that stage, he applied for change of category from OBC to General as he had qualified for appointment on merit. The request was turned down by the impugned communication on 24.08.2004. The respondent approached the Tribunal for quashing the said order and for a direction to appoint him on the post of Divisional Accountant/Auditor/ Jr. Accountant/UDC as per his merit in the general category irrespective of his caste. The Tribunal by the impugned order directed the petitioners herein to consider the respondent in the general category for appointment on the appropriate post as per his merit as if he does not belong to the OBC category. 3. The case of the petitioners is that candidates belonging to OBC were required to make a declaration that they do not belong to the creamy layer section of the OBC. The respondent made a false declaration that he does not belong to the creamy layer section. Further, the request for change of category was belated as the same was made after final publication of the results and he had never made such request before the Staff Selection Commission. 4. The respondent made a false declaration that he does not belong to the creamy layer section. Further, the request for change of category was belated as the same was made after final publication of the results and he had never made such request before the Staff Selection Commission. 4. The question which at first instance comes to mind is whether signing a declaration in the printed proforma of the application form the respondent rendered himself disqualified for appointment, but the main question is whether the person who has qualified for appointment on merit, i.e., in the general category should still be treated as belonging to OBC and on the ground that he had made declaration to the effect that he does not belong to creamy layer section of the OBC, deny him the appointment. It is true that candidates are supposed to make true declaration of facts in columns of the application but in the instant case, the declaration could be bona fide and in any case, lost its relevance after the respondent qualified for appointment on merit. The change of category to general was to follow as a consequence. It is the settled position that a candidate belonging to a reserve category but qualifying for appointment on merit has to be considered for appointment in the general category and not in the category under which he had applied. That is what the petitioner should have done on their own and the respondent was not required to make a formal request. In this view of the matter, we do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal to warrant interference by this Court. 5. In the result, we find no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed