Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2010 Supreme(SC) 1186

Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATNAIK
Suraj Bhan Meena & Another
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Others
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.6385 OF 2010 WITH SLP(C) NOS.7716, 7717, 7826, 7838 of 2010
Decided on : 07-12-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:P.P. Rao, Rajeev Dhawan, Pallav Shishodia, M.R. Calla, Sr. Advocates, Dr. Manish Singhvi, AAG, Dr. Krishan Singh Chauhan, Chand Kiran, Ajit Kumar Ekka, Tej Singh Varun, Devanshu Kumar Devesh, R. Gopalakrishnan, Jaswant Persoya, Rajesh Kumar, Ms. Binu Tamta, Pradeep Aggarwal, Ms. N. Annapoorani, L.P. Singh, Ram Niwas, Shobhit Tiwari, Brijesh Singh, M.L. Lahoty, Mukul Kumar, Rishi Matoliya, Ms. Pratiksha Sharma, Ms. Charu Mathur, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
State can frame rules for reservation in promotion to SC and ST and consequential seniority provided the three exercises as directed in M. Nagraj’s case are undertaken.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India – Article 16(4A) and Rule 33, Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules – Reservation in promotion – ‘Catch-up’ rule – Consequential seniority – Rules framed, if any, should be based on quantifiable data about backwardness, inadequacy of representation in public employment and overall administrative inefficiency – State government providing consequential seniority to SC and ST without undertaking the three exercises. (Para 7, 8, 12)
       (2006) 8 SCC 212 – Relied upon
       (b) Service Law – Seniority – Not a vested right – Can be interfered – By making a Rule under the Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. (Para 19)
       (1997) 8 SCC 522; (2010) 5 SCALE 730 – Relied upon
       (c) Service Law – Reservation – Doctrine of eclipse – Reservation policy extended in 1975 for five years after overruling Rangachari by Indra Sawhney – Does not mean that after 5 years it will lapse. (Para 21)
       (1962) 2 SCR 586; (1992) Supp.(3) SCC 217 – Referred
       (d) Constitution of India – Article 16(4A) – Reservation in promotion – Consequential seniority – Width and identity test – State can frame rules for consequential seniority in promotion to reserved category candidates – However, any rule granting reservation in promotion would be subject to Article 335 – Requirement of quantifiable data. (Para 39, 44, 46)
       (1995) 6 SCC 684; (1996) 2 SCC 715; (1999) 7 SCC 251; (1999) 7 SCC 209; (1992) Supp.(3) SCC 217; (2006) 8 SCC 212 – Relied upon
       (1997) 6 SCC 538 – Referred
       (e) Service Law – Reservation to SC and ST – ‘Catch-up’ rule and ‘consequential seniority’ – Judicially evolved concepts – Cannot be elevated to the status of a constitutional principle – Could be taken care of by amending the Constitution – 77th and 85th Constitution amendment therefore held valid by M. Nagaraj. (Para 45)
       (2006) 8 SCC 212 – Relied upon
       Facts of the case:
       Provisional Seniority List of Rajasthan Administrative Service Selection Grade as on 1.4.1997 was issued on 26th June, 2000, in which the Writ Petitioner No.1, Bajrang Lal Sharma, was placed above Suraj Bhan Meena (Scheduled Tribe) and Sriram Choradia (Scheduled Caste). The said Seniority List was published pursuant to the order of Supreme Court in (1999) 7 SCC 209 and (1999) 7 SCC 251. The final Seniority Lists of Super Time Scale and Selection Scale of the service on 24.6.2008 as on 1.4.1997 and Provisional Seniority List dated 2.7.2008 as on 1.4.2008 were published, wherein the name of Bajrang Lal Sharma was shown below the names of both Suraj Bhan Meena and Sriram Choradia.
       The Rajasthan "Various Service Rules" were amended on 25.4.2008 with effect from 28.12.2002.
       This notification was challenged by filing writ petition.
       Finding of the Court:
       High Court rightly quashed the notification issued by the State of Rajasthan.
       Result:
       SLP filed by petitioners disposed of. SLP filed by State of Rajasthan dismissed.

Judgment :

ALTAMAS KABIR, J.

1. Since common questions of fact and law are involved, five Special Leave Petitions have been taken up for hearing and final disposal together. While SLP(C)No.6385 of 2010 has been filed by Suraj Bhan Meena & Anr., SLP(C) Nos.7716, 7717, 7826 and 7838 of 2010, have all been filed by the State of Rajasthan.

2. All the petitioners are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 5th February, 2010, passed by the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.618/2009 filed by the State of Rajasthan & Anr. against Bajrang Lal Sharma & Ors., D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.3/2010 filed by Suraj Bhan Meena against Bajrang Lal Sharma & Ors., D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.611/2009 filed by the State of Rajasthan against Gyan Prakash Shukla, D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.610/2009 filed by the State of Rajasthan against M.M. Joshi, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8104/2008 filed by Bajrang Lal Sharma & Ors. against the State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6241/2008 filed by Gyan Prakash Shukla & Anr. against the State of Rajasthan & Ors. and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7775/2009 filed by M.M. Joshi against the State of Rajasthan & Ors. As indicated hereinbefore, all the matters were heard and disposed of by a common judgment passed by the Division Bench on 5th February, 2010. While considering the writ petitions along with the writ appeals, the Division Bench referred to the facts of D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8104/2008, against which SLP(C)No.6385/2010 has been filed by Suraj Bhan Meena and SLP(C) No.7716/2010 has been filed by the State of Rajasthan. The other Special Leave Petitions have been filed against the orders passed in the Writ Petitions filed by the private respondents therein.

3. All the writ petitioners, as also the Petitioners in SLP(C) No.6385/2010, are members of the Rajasthan Administrative Service and are governed by the Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules, 1954. The writ petitioners in their respective writ petitions challenged the Notification dated 25th April, 2008, issued by the State of Rajasthan in exercise of its powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India amending the Rajasthan "Various Service Rules" with effect from 28.12.2002.

4. According to the writ petitioners, they had been inducted in the Rajasthan Administrative Service in December, 1982, through selection by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. Vide notice dated 26th June, 2000, the State Government issued a Provisional Seniority List of Rajasthan Administrative Service Selection Grade as on 1.4.1997, in which the Writ Petitioner No.1, Bajrang Lal Sharma, was placed above Suraj Bhan Meena (Scheduled Tribe) and Sriram Choradia (Scheduled Caste). The said Seniority List was published pursuant to the order of this Court dated 16.9.1999, passed in the case of Ajit Singh-II & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [(1999) 7 SCC 209] and another order of the same date in the case of Ram Prasad vs. D.K. Vijay [(1999) 7 SCC 251]. Once again Provisional Seniority Lists were published on 27.11.2003 and 12.5.2008. Subsequently, the State of Rajasthan published the final Seniority Lists of Super Time Scale and Selection Scale of the service on 24.6.2008 as on 1.4.1997 and Provisional Seniority List dated 2.7.2008 as on 1.4.2008, wherein the name of Bajrang Lal Sharma was shown below the names of both Suraj Bhan Meena and Sriram Choradia.

5. The Notification dated 25.4.2008, which was the subject matter of challenge in the Writ Petition was challenged on two grounds. It was firstly contended that the proviso dated 28.12.2002, which had been added to the Various Service Rules was subject to the final decision of this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.234/2002 filed by the All India Equality Forum against the Union of India & Ors., but the same was yet to be decided. Therefore, during the pendency of the Writ Petition before this Court, the Res

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2010 Supreme(SC) 1186

Supreme Court of India THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATNAIK Suraj Bhan Meena & Another Versus State of Rajasthan & Others SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.6385 OF 2010 WITH SLP(C) NOS.7716, 7717, 7826, 7838 of 2010 Decided on : 07-12-2010

IMPORTANT POINTState can frame rules for reservation in promotion to SC and ST and consequential seniority provided the three exercises as directed in M. Nagraj’s case are undertaken.

Cases Referred (9)

Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATNAIK
Suraj Bhan Meena & Another
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Others
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.6385 OF 2010 WITH SLP(C) NOS.7716, 7717, 7826, 7838 of 2010
Decided on : 07-12-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
State can frame rules for reservation in promotion to SC and ST and consequential seniority provided the three exercises as directed in M. Nagraj’s case are undertaken.