SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.
Pravakar Mallick & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
The State of Orissa & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3240 OF 2011 WITH Civil Appeal No.4421 of 2011
Decided On : 17-04-2020
Constitution of India – Article 16(4A) – Reservation in promotion – In case State is of opinion, SC & STs are not adequately represented, State is empowered to make a provision for reservation in matters of promotion with consequential seniority, to any class – State is not bound to make reservation for SCs/STs in matters of promotion – However, if they wish to exercise their discretion and make reservations in promotion, States have to collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of class and inadequacy of representation of that class in public employment, keeping in mind maintenance of efficiency, as indicated by Article 335 of Constitution of India-Need for collecting quantifiable data and ascertaining inadequacy of representation of members belonging to SC/STs is a condition precedent for issuing notifications providing benefit of reservation with consequential seniority – Mere fact that there is no proportionate representation in promotional posts for reserved category candidates, by itself is not sufficient to extend benefit of consequential seniority to promotees who are otherwise juniors – It is open for State to confer benefit even through an executive order by applying mandatory requirements as contemplated under Article 16(4A). (Paras 11 and 12)
Facts of the Case:
Instant civil appeal is filed, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24.12.2010 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in W.P. (C) No.6781 of 2008. By the aforesaid order, writ petition filed by respondent nos.4 to 8 herein, is allowed by setting aside the order dated 17.04.2008 passed in O.A.No.904(C) of 2008 etc. by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal and the Government Resolution dated 20.03.2002 and the consequential Gradation List dated 03.03.2008 of Orissa Administrative Services, Class-I (Junior Branch) are quashed.
Findings of the Court:
In view of the stand of the respondent-State in the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition and further in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the State of Orissa that no benefit of seniority was extended by any State Act or by any executive order by examining adequate representation in terms of Article 16(4A) of Constitution, we do not find any merit in this appeal so as to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment of the High Court.
Result : Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
R. Subhash Reddy, J.
Civil Appeal No.3240 of 2011
1. This civil appeal is filed, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24.12.2010 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in W.P. (C) No.6781 of 2008. By the aforesaid order, writ petition filed by respondent nos.4 to 8 herein, is allowed by setting aside the order dated 17.04.2008 passed in O.A.No.904(C) of 2008 etc. by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal and the Government Resolution dated 20.03.2002 and the consequential Gradation List dated 03.03.2008 of Orissa Administrative Services, Class-I (Junior Branch) are quashed.
2. In view of the instructions issued in Office Memorandum dated 21.01.2002, by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, the Government of Orissa has passed Resolution dated 20.03.2002. By the aforesaid Resolution, while withdrawing the earlier instructions, for fixation of seniority of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) government servants on promotion by virtue of rule of reservation, the State Government has issued instructions to the effect that the “Catch Up Principle” adopted earlier by the State Government in General Administration Department Resolution No.39374 dated 02.11.2000 shall not be followed any longer. It is further ordered that the government servants belonging to SCs/STs shall retain their seniority in the case of promotion by virtue of rule of reservation. In the said G.O. it is further clarified that the government servants belonging to general/OBC category promoted later will be placed junior to the SC/ST government servants promoted earlier, by virtue of rule of reservation.
3. The High Court has allowed the abovementioned writ petition and the connected writ petitions and quashed the aforesaid G.O. and Gradation List dated 03.03.2008 mainly on the ground that, unless and until the State Government makes a law for conferring the benefit of promotion with consequential seniority to SC/ST candidates, they are not entitled to claim seniority in the promoted categories over the general category candidates. The said writ petition is allowed, following the judgment of this Court in the case of M. Nagaraj & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (2006) 8 SCC 212
4. The respondent-writ petitioners were appointed to Orissa Administrative Service-II (OAS-II) posts pursuant to selections made by the Orissa Public Service Commission. They were recruited during the years 1983, 1984 and 1987. They were assigned different ranks in the merit list for their respective batches prepared by the Public Service Commission. In the above said merit list, persons belonging to SC/ST category, who were appointed against the reserved vacancies were placed below the writ petitioners. Thus, the writ petitioners were senior to appointees belonging to SC/ST category. The respondent-writ petitioners were subsequently promoted and appointed in the next higher category, i.e., Orissa Administrative Service-I (OAS-I)(JB) vide Government Notification dated 26.08.2000. The appellants and some others belonging to SC and ST category, recruited along with the respondent-writ petitioners in subsequent batches, were given promotion to the rank of OAS-I(JB) against reserved vacancies during the year 1995 and 2000 as provided under Orissa Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (For Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act, 1975 and the rules made thereunder. The seniority of reserved categories and unreserved categories, including that of the respondent-writ petitioners was not finalised by the Public Service Commission since the principles determining seniority, inter se, was the subject matter of several litigations. The original seniority position in the cadre of OAS-II prepared by the Public Service Commission was retained without any changes in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Virpal Singh Chauhan & Ors., AIR 1996 SC 448 = (1995) 6 SCC 684. Irrespective of getting promotion in
M. Nagaraj & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Union of India & Ors. v. Virpal Singh Chauhan & Ors.
Jagdish Lal & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Ajit Singh & Ors. (II) v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Suraj Bhan Meena & Anr. V. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
B.K. Pavitra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Jarnail Singh & Ors. v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.