1. Appointment in reserved category in undivided state — Allocation to successor state under Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 — Denial of reservation in limited departmental examination. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 380
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.
Akhilesh Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Jharkhand Public Service Commission And Ors. – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 3180 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP (Civil) No. 18890 of 2021)
Decided on : 26-04-2022
Important Points
The duty of Parliament to ensure no individual is disadvantaged due to state reorganization, and the protection of service conditions and benefits under the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000.
Subject
State Reorganization - Reservation and Service Conditions
Act Referred
ANDHRA PRADESH RE-ORGANIZATION ACT: S.78
BIHAR REORGANISATION ACT: S.72, S.73, S.74
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art.342, Art.341, Art.15, Art.16
MADHYA PRADESH REORGANISATION ACT: S.69, S.70
UTTAR PRADESH REORGANISATION ACT: S.74, S.75
BIHAR REORGANISATION ACT: S.72, S.73, S.74
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art.342, Art.341, Art.15, Art.16
MADHYA PRADESH REORGANISATION ACT: S.69, S.70
UTTAR PRADESH REORGANISATION ACT: S.74, S.75
Headnote
Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 - Reservation - Sections 73 and 74 - The court considered the entitlement of a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Jharkhand after reorganization. The judgment discussed the protection of service conditions and benefits under the Act, and the duty of Parliament to ensure no individual is disadvantaged due to state reorganization.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a member of the Scheduled Tribe (ST), challenged his non-selection in a limited departmental examination for promotion to the post of Deputy Collector in the State of Jharkhand. The High Court allowed the writ petition, directing the authorities to consider the appellant's candidature as a reserved category candidate.
Finding of the Court:
The Division Bench of the High Court found that the limited departmental examination was a fresh appointment, and the appellant could not rely upon the provisions of Sections 72 and 73 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000. The court held that the appellant failed to comply with the advertisement's condition and could not be considered as belonging to the reserved category of STs for the examination.
Issues: The court considered whether the limited departmental examination was a fresh appointment or promotion, the applicability of Sections 73 of the Act in the selection process, the challenge to the advertisement's condition by unsuccessful candidates, and whether reservation could be a condition of service for fresh appointments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant, being a member of the ST known as Gond in the undivided State of Bihar, was entitled to the benefits and protection under Sections 72 and 73 of the Act. The judgment emphasized the protection of service conditions and benefits for employees affected by state reorganization.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Division Bench's judgment and restoring the Single Judge's order in favor of the appellant.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Parties :Manoj Tandon, Mayank Sapre, Kumar Shivam, Rohit Anil Rathi, Himanshu Shekhar, Parth Shekhar, Arunabh Chowdhury, Pragya Baghel, Kumar Anuragh Singh, Abhishek Roy, Tulika Mukherjee, Akshat Singh, Zain Khan, Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocates
For the Parties :Manoj Tandon, Mayank Sapre, Kumar Shivam, Rohit Anil Rathi, Himanshu Shekhar, Parth Shekhar, Arunabh Chowdhury, Pragya Baghel, Kumar Anuragh Singh, Abhishek Roy, Tulika Mukherjee, Akshat Singh, Zain Khan, Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocates
Table of Contents
2. Whether limited departmental examination constitutes fresh appointment or promotion — Applicability of Section 73, Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, regarding reservation benefits. (Para 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 )
3. Limited departmental examinations provide accelerated promotion for in-service candidates — Not direct recruitment from open market — Service conditions protected under Section 73, Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000. (Para 17 , 19 , 20 )
4. Limited departmental examinations are promotional channels; reservation benefits of employees allocated to successor states are protected under Section 73, Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000. (Para 17 , 20 )
5. Appeal allowed — Division Bench judgment set aside — Single Judge order restored. (Para 24 )
6. Is a limited departmental examination considered a fresh appointment or a promotional channel?
It is a promotional channel providing accelerated promotion to meritorious in-service candidates, distinct from direct recruitment from the open market, as it is only available to those already in service. (Para 19 , 20 )
7. Does Section 73 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, protect reservation benefits for employees allocated to a successor state?
Yes, existing service conditions, including reservation benefits and privileges enjoyed prior to the appointed day, shall not be varied to the employee's disadvantage after allocation to a successor state. (Para 4 , 17 )
8. Can an employee allocated to a successor state claim reservation benefits in subsequent open competitions within that state?
Yes, such employees are entitled to claim reservation benefits for all practical purposes, including participation in open competitions for public employment, provided they do not claim benefits in both successor states simultaneously. (Para 17 )
9. How does the court distinguish between voluntary migration and state reorganization regarding SC/ST status?
Voluntary migration generally results in loss of reservation benefits in the new state, but state reorganization is an involuntary movement; thus, Parliament has a constitutional obligation to ensure individuals are not disadvantaged. (Para 8 , 10 )
JUDGMENT
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the judgment and final order dated 12.05.2021 passed by the Division Bench of High Court1 [High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi.] in LPA No. 609 of 2017.
3. In the Graduate Level (Special) Competitive Examination held in the year 1994 for filling up the posts of Cooperative Development Officers, the then Bihar Public Service Commission vide letter dated 24.07.1995 recommended the name of the appellant, who was at serial No. 98 in the merit list, under Scheduled Tribe ('ST, for short) category. The claim that the appellant belonged to ST category (Gond) was supported by a Certificate issued to that effect on 03.06.1995 by the Scrutiny Officer, Sonpur (Saran) which place now falls in the newly carved State of Bihar after reorganization of States. Later, appointment letter dated 10.11.1995 was issued to the selected candidates including the appellant. The appropriate entry in the service book shows the name and category of the appellant as belonging to ST (Gond).
4. The then State of Bihar was bifurcated as a result of Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 [Act 30 of 2000] ('the Act', for short), which came into force on 15.11.2000. The erstwhile State of Bihar was bifurcated in successor States viz. State of Bihar comprising of 38 districts and newly formed State of Jharkhand comprising of 18 districts. Sections 73 and 74 of the Act are as under:-
"73. Other provisions relating to services.-(1) Nothing in section 72 shall be deemed to affect on or after the appointed day the operation of the provisions of Chapter I of Part XIV of the Constitution in relation to determination of the conditions of service of persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Union or any State: Provided that the conditions of service applicable immediately before the appointed day in the case of any person deemed to have been allocated to the State of Bihar or to the State of Jharkhand under section 72 shall not be varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. (2) All services prior to the appointed day rendered by a person- (a) if he is deemed to have been allocated to any State under section 72, shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of that State; (b) if he is deemed to have been allocated to the Union in connection with the administration of the Jharkhand shall be deemed to have been rendered in connection with the affairs of the Union, for the purposes of the rules regulating his conditions of service. (3) The provisions of section 72, shall not apply in relation to members of any All-India Service.
74. Provisions as to continuance of officers in same post.-Every person who, immediately before the appointed day is holding or discharging the duties of any post or office in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Bihar in any area which on that day falls within any of the successor States shall continue to hold the same post or office in that successor State, and shall be deemed, on and from that day, to have been duly appointed to the post or office by the Government of, or any other appropriate authority in, that successor State: Provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a competent authority, on and from the appointed day, from passing in relation to such person any order affecting the continuance in such post or office."
5. After reorganization of the States, the appellant's service was allocated to the successor State of Jharkhand and since then the appellant has been in the service of State of Jharkhand.
6. On 14.08.2008, a letter was issued by the Principal Secretary, Government of Jharkhand to all the Secretaries of departments regarding reservation in promotion in various categories of services under the State of Jharkhand. Paragraphs 1 and 4 of the communication were as under: -
"Sir, with reference to above subject, I, as directed, have to submit that, certain department
