2007 Supreme(SC) 1357

2007(7) Supreme 274
Supreme Court of india
(From Andhra Pradesh High Court)
S.B. Sinha & Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ.
Marripati Nagaraja & Ors. — Petitioners
versus
The Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. — Respondents
Appeal (civil) 4868 of 2007
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 7222 of 2004)
[With CA Nos.4869-4873/07 arising out of SLP (C) Nos.15032-15036 of 2004]
Decided on : 12-10-2007

important point
When the constitutionality of the rule was not under challenge, High Court erred in restricting its scope.

Headnote:(a)Service Law – Appointment – Well settled that the rules prevailing at the time of the notification would be applicable for selecting the candidates – It is also equally well settled that the State may, subject to constitutional limitations, amend the rule with retrospective effect.(Para 12)

       (b)Constitution of India – Article 309, Proviso – State, in exercise of its power conferred upon it under the proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, is entitled to make rules with retrospective effect and retro-active operation – If some rule has been given a retrospective effect the applicable rule would not be the rule which was existing but the one which had been validly brought on the statute book from an anterior date – By substituting Rule 22-A(2), women were given preference and no existing right of any person had been taken away – The Tribunal and High Court erred in opining otherwise, particularly when the constitutionality of the said rule was not in question.(Paras 13 and 14)

       (c)Service Law – Appointment – In this case, the qualification of a candidate is not in question and nobody has been deprived of his right of being considered – Only a preferential right had been given to the women by amending the rule – High Court, therefore, was not correct.(Para 16)

       (1990) 3 SCC 157 – Relied upon.

       (d)Service Law – Appointment – All the candidates were given the same time for preparation – Only because the appellants herein were employees at the relevant time, the same by itself could not confer on them any special privilege to ask for an extended time – They had no legal right in relation thereto – Appellants after having appeared at the examination without any demur are, therefore, estopped and precluded from questioning the selection process on being unsuccessful.(Para 17)

       Facts of the case:

       Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, on the advice of the State of Andhra Pradesh, issued a notification on or about 1.10.1992 inviting applications for recruitment to various posts including 34 posts in the category of Assistant Director of Agriculture in the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Service. Although in the said notification stipulations were made in respect of grant of reservation for women to the extent of 30%, no such stipulation was made in respect of the vacancies in the category of Assistant Director of Agriculture. This appeal involves the question of reservation of women in the said category.

       Appellants herein had been working as Agricultural Officer in Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Service. They, in terms of the said notification, applied for the said posts. A screening test was to be held therefor. About 510 candidates appeared for the screening test on 27.12.1992.

       Several original applications were filed before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunals claiming different reliefs and on different grounds. Appellant herein filed an original application questioning the carry forward of vacancies from the year 1976; the omission to make zonal reservation; prescription of minimum and maximum age limits by way of eligibility criteria as a result whereof, allegedly, some of the agricultural officers were deprived of their right to apply for the posts.

       The State of Andhra Pradesh issued GOMs No.928 G.A.D. on or about 6.10.1995 providing for reservations of women candidates to the extent of 30% in the matter of direct recruitment with retrospective effect from 2.1.1984. By reason of another Notification issued on 28.5.1996, the percentage of reservation for women was increased to 331/3%. Original Applications filed by the petitioners as also those of other employees were dismissed by the Tribunal on 23.11.1998.

       An application filed by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission to short-list the candidates was allowed by the Tribunal by an order dated 14.11.2000 by holding a fresh screening test for the 510 candidates who had appeared therein on 27.12.1992 and to finalise the result. A Notification for conducting a fresh screening test was issued on 12.12.2000 pursuant whereto a second screening test was conducted on 7.1.2001. Appellant, although appeared, did not pass the said test.

       On the premise that a very limited time had been granted to them for appearing in the second screening test as also on the ground that no reservation for women could be provided for in terms of the said Notification dated 28.5.1996, an original application was filed by the appellants before the Tribunal on 8.1.2001. No order of stay was passed therein.

       The Public Service Commission interviewed the candidates on 8.1.2001 and 9.1.2001 who had been found suitable therefor. An interim order was passed by the Tribunal only on 9.1.2001. However, by order dated 1.8.2003, the original applications were dismissed by the Tribunal holding that the selections made by the Commission did not call for any interference except to the extent that the selections have to be revised restricting the reservation in favour of women to the extent of 30% and wherever vacancies which were reserved to be filled by women candidates could not be filled for want of women candidates, they should be filled up by men in terms of the rules existing at the time of notification.

       Writ petition filed by the appellants questioning the same was dismissed. A writ application was also filed by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission challenging the decision of the Tribunal restricting reservation for women to 30% instead of 331/3%. By reason of the impugned judgment both the writ petitions have been dismissed.

       Findings of the Court:

       Appellants after having appeared at the examination without any demur are, therefore, estopped and precluded from questioning the selection process on being unsuccessful.

       Result : Appeals by Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission allowed.