Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CG) 8811
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
S. Santosh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Law And Legislative Affairs – Respondent
WPPIL No. 91 of 2019 | WPS No. 9778 of 2019 | WPS No. 839 of 2020 | WPS No. 3600 of 2020 | WA No. 286 of 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Mr. Anand Dadariya, Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Mr. Amiya Bhushan, Mr. Parag Kotecha, Mr. Tribhuwan Das
For the Respondents: Mr.Sanjay Hegde, Dr. Manoj Gorkela, Mr. Pranjal Kishore, Mr. Arvind Panda, Mr. D.L. Dewangan, Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dr. K.S. Chauhan, Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, Mr. Ajit Kumar Ekka, Mr. Alhilesh Dalpat, Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, Mr. Piyush Bhoi
Reservation in promotions requires quantifiable data showing inadequacy of SC/ST representation, essential for compliance with constitutional mandates and Supreme Court precedents.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16(4A) and 16(4B) - Writ petitions challenging amendments to Promotion Rules, which increased reservation percentages for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, declaring them ultra vires due to non-compliance with previous Supreme Court directives regarding quantifiable data showing inadequacy of representation. (Paras 4, 31, 28, 23)
(B) Legal Principles - The court emphasized the necessity of gathering quantifiable data before implementing any amendments to the promotion rules. Decisions must align with the Constitution's provisions regarding reservation and equality. (Paras 12, 28)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners contested three notifications that amended reservation policies in civil service promotions, asserting that these were made without required statistical support and were contrary to Supreme Court judgments. Notifications amended reservation percentages without first collecting and verifying supported data. (Paras 5, 12)
Findings of Court:
All notifications were deemed ultra vires, as the State had acted contrary to legal mandates requiring data collection for justifying such reservations. The State was ordered to reformulate the promotion rules within three months. (Paras 31, 32)
Issues: Whether the notifications contravened protections against arbitrary enhancements of reservations without justifiable data as required under Articles 14, 16(4A), and (4B). (Paras 4, 31)
Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted that amendments without valid justifications are unconstitutional, directing that any promotion reservation systems must reflect court-established standards and procedures, particularly regarding the collection of adequate data on SC/ST representation. (Paras 23, 32)
Result: Writ petitions allowed. Notifications questioned were quashed and the State was instructed to reformulate the promotion rules properly. (Paras 31, 34)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of case submissions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. challenged notifications concerning reservation laws. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments against lack of quantifiable data. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. importance of quantifiable data and case precedents. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. court's directive on reworking promotion rules. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 6. conclusion and order regarding promotion rules. (Para 32 , 33 , 38) |
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
1. Heard Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner in WPPIL No. 91/2019, Mr. Anand Dadariya, Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Mr. Abhishek Gupta & Mr. Amiya Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioners in WPS No. 9778/2019, Mr. Parag Kotecha, learned counsel for the petitioners in WPS No. 839/2020 and Mr. Tribhuwan Das, learned counsel for the appellants in WA No. 286/2021. Also heard Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Senior Advocate assisted by Dr. Manoj Gorkela, Special Counsel, Government of Chhattisgarh and Mr. Pranjal Kishore, learned counsel, appearing for the State/respondents, Mr. Arvind Panda holding the brief of Mr. D.L. Dewangan, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 5 in WPS No. 9778/2019 and respondent Nos. 3 to 6 in WPS No. 839/2020, Mr. Jitendra Pali, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.3 in WA No. 286/2021 and Dr. K.S. Chauhan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, Mr. Ajit Kumar Ekka, Mr. Akhilesh Dalpat, Mr. Tribhuwan Das, Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Mr. Ravi Maheshwari and Mr. Piyush Bhoi, learned counsel, appearing for the respective intervenors.
2. Since all these writ petitions i.e. WP(PIL) No. 91/2019, WP(S) Nos.9778/2019, 839/2020 and 3600/2020 and writ appeal i.e. WA No.286/2021 arise out of similar issues, they are being clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
3. WP(S) No. 9778 of 2019 is taken as the lead case and the parties & proceedings are referred to as given therein except where it is separately mentioned, depending on the context.
4. The Challenge in this writ petition are the Notification dated 31.10.2019 (Annexure-P/1), Notification dated 22.10.2019 (Annexure-P/2) and Notification dated 30.10.2019 (Annexure-P/3) to be declared as ultra vires to the provisions contained under Article 14 and 16(4A) of the Constitution of India and also in contravention of the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court. The reliefs claimed in the writ petition are as follows :
- “10.1. To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.
10.2. To issue an appropriate writ or order and declare that the notification dated 31.10.19 (Annexure P-1), 22.10.19 (Annexure P-2) and notification dated 30.10.19 (Annexure P-3) are bad in law and ultra vires to the provisions contained under Article 14 and 16 (4A) and in contravention of orders passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Hon’ble Court.
10.3. To issue an appropriate writ or order and quash the notification dated 31.10.19 (Annexure P-1), 22.10.19 (Annexure P-2) and notification dated 30.10.19 (Annexure P-3) and grant all other consequential benefits.
10.4. Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.”
5. The notification dated 31.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) is issued by the respondent No.3 Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited by which they have adopted with immediate effect the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Promotion) Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Promotion Rules, 2003’) as amended by its notification dated 22.10.2019. The notification dated 22.10.2019 is issued by the State of Chhattisgarh, by which the said Promotion Rules, 2003 has been amended and the percentage of reservation was amended as 13% for Scheduled Castes and 32% for Scheduled Tribes in place of 15% for Scheduled Castes and 23% for Scheduled Tribes. The notification dated 30.10.2019 (Annexure P-3) is also issued by the State of Chhattisgarh in furtherance of the n
