# ) AJIT SINGH JANUJA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

- **Citation:** [1996] 3 S.C.R. 125
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1996-03-01
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal Nos. 37923794 of 1989
- **Bench:** J.S. Verma, N.P. Singh, K. Venkataswami
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/ajit-singh-januja-and-others-v-state-of-punjab-and-others-14039
- **Pages:** 25

## Headnote

Se1Vice Law-Promotions Rese1Vation for members of Scheduled CasA
B
tes and Backward Classes-Applicability of roster system-Accelerated
promotion-Whether such appointees/promotees can claim promotion against C
general category posts in the higher grade, on basis of their 'accelerated
seniority' in the lower grade-field, N&-Constitution of India, Articles 16(4),
335.
The petitioners working in Punjab Civil Secretarial filed writ peti·
lions alleging that the policy for reservation in respect of candidates D
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, was being imple·
mented by the State Government in a manner, because of which the
members belonging to Schednled Castes and Backward Classes were hold·
ing posts in excess to their reservation quota and this was not only
prejudicial but detrimental to the right of the petitioners for being considered for promotion to higher grade. The writ petitions were dismissed E
by the Full Bench of the High Court holding that non consideration of
Scheduled Caste candidates against general categories posts for purpose
of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the
Constitution and that there was no bar to the appointment/promotion of
larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The High Court relied on F
circulars dated 19· 7 -1969 and 8-9-1969 for purpose of holding that even
after the percentage reserved in a cadre is filled and the roster is complete,
the members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes can be
promoted against general category posts on basis of seniority. These
appeals had been filed against the judgment of the Full Bench. The
respondents alleged that such appointees/promotees conld be considered G
.>;
against posts meant for general category candidates merely becanse they
had become senior on basis of accelerated promotions.
The question raised was, whether, after the members of the
Scheduled Castes/Tribes or Backward Classes for whom specific percent· H
125
126
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
A age of posts have been reserved and roster has been provided having been
promoted against those posts on the basis of 'accelerated promotion'
because of reservation of posts and applicability of the roster system, can
claim promotion against general category posts in still higher grade on the
basis of their seniority which itself is the result of accelerated promotion
B on basis of reservation and roster.
Disposing of the matters, this Court
HELD : 1.1. Once the quota is full and roster has stopped for
members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes in respect of
C whom reservation has been made and roster has been prescribed then their
case for promotion to still higher grade against general category posts
have to be considered not treating them as members of the Scheduled
Castes or Backward Classes "on any crutch". They cannot be promoted
only on basis of their 'accelerated seniority' against the general category
D posts. The accelerated promotions are to be made only against the posts
reserved or roster prescribed. There is no question of that benefit being
available when a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes claims
promotion against general category posts in the higher grade. Snch candidates who are members of the Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes
and have got promotion on basis of reservation and application of roster
E before their seniors in the lower grade belonging to general category, in
this process have not superseded them, because there was no inter se
comparison of merit between them. As such when such seniors who belong
to general category, are promoted later it cannot be said that they have
been superseded by such members of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class
F who have been promoted earlier. While considering them for further
promotion against general category posts if the only fact that they have
been promoted earlier being members of Scheduled Castes or Backward
Class is taken into consideration, then

## Text

_Characters 0–39,973 of 62,337. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39973 for what follows._

)
AJIT SINGH JANUJA AND OTHERS
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
MARCH 1, 1996
[J.S. VERMA, N.P. SINGH AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.)
Se1Vice Law-Promotions Rese1Vation for members of Scheduled CasA
B
tes and Backward Classes-Applicability of roster system-Accelerated
promotion-Whether such appointees/promotees can claim promotion against C
general category posts in the higher grade, on basis of their 'accelerated
seniority' in the lower grade-field, N&-Constitution of India, Articles 16(4),
335.
The petitioners working in Punjab Civil Secretarial filed writ peti·
lions alleging that the policy for reservation in respect of candidates D
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, was being imple·
mented by the State Government in a manner, because of which the
members belonging to Schednled Castes and Backward Classes were hold·
ing posts in excess to their reservation quota and this was not only
prejudicial but detrimental to the right of the petitioners for being considered for promotion to higher grade. The writ petitions were dismissed E
by the Full Bench of the High Court holding that non consideration of
Scheduled Caste candidates against general categories posts for purpose
of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the
Constitution and that there was no bar to the appointment/promotion of
larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The High Court relied on F
circulars dated 19· 7 -1969 and 8-9-1969 for purpose of holding that even
after the percentage reserved in a cadre is filled and the roster is complete,
the members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes can be
promoted against general category posts on basis of seniority. These
appeals had been filed against the judgment of the Full Bench. The
respondents alleged that such appointees/promotees conld be considered G
.>;
against posts meant for general category candidates merely becanse they
had become senior on basis of accelerated promotions.
The question raised was, whether, after the members of the
Scheduled Castes/Tribes or Backward Classes for whom specific percent· H
125
126
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
A age of posts have been reserved and roster has been provided having been
promoted against those posts on the basis of 'accelerated promotion'
because of reservation of posts and applicability of the roster system, can
claim promotion against general category posts in still higher grade on the
basis of their seniority which itself is the result of accelerated promotion
B on basis of reservation and roster.
Disposing of the matters, this Court
HELD : 1.1. Once the quota is full and roster has stopped for
members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes in respect of
C whom reservation has been made and roster has been prescribed then their
case for promotion to still higher grade against general category posts
have to be considered not treating them as members of the Scheduled
Castes or Backward Classes "on any crutch". They cannot be promoted
only on basis of their 'accelerated seniority' against the general category
D posts. The accelerated promotions are to be made only against the posts
reserved or roster prescribed. There is no question of that benefit being
available when a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes claims
promotion against general category posts in the higher grade. Snch candidates who are members of the Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes
and have got promotion on basis of reservation and application of roster
E before their seniors in the lower grade belonging to general category, in
this process have not superseded them, because there was no inter se
comparison of merit between them. As such when such seniors who belong
to general category, are promoted later it cannot be said that they have
been superseded by such members of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class
F who have been promoted earlier. While considering them for further
promotion against general category posts if the only fact that they have
been promoted earlier being members of Scheduled Castes or Backward
Class is taken into consideration, then it shall violate the equality clause.
As such it will be only rational, just and proper to hold that when the
general category candidate is promoted later from the lower grade to the
G higher grade, he will be considered senior to a candidate belonging to the
scheduled caste/tribe who had been given accelerated promotion against
the post reserved for him. Whenever a question arises for filling up a post
reserved for scheduled caste/tribe candidate in still higher grade then sncb
candidate belonging to scheduled caste/tribe shall be promoted first but
H when the consideration is in respect of promotion against the general
\
'
)
)
AS.JANUJAv. STATE
127
category post in still higher grade then the general category candidate who A
has been promoted later shall be considered senior and his case shall be
~
considered first for promotion applying either principle of seniority cum
merit or merit cum seniority. If this rule and procedure is not applied then
result will be that majority of the posts in the higher grade shall be held
at one stage by persons who have not only entered in service on basis of B
reservation and roster but have excluded the general category candidates
from being promoted to the posts reserved for general category candidates
merely on the ground of their initial accelerated promotions. This will not
be consistent with the requirement or the spirit of Article 16(4) or Article
335 of the Constitution. [141-G; 142-B, D; 148-F-H, 149-A-B]
1.2 Circular dated 4-5-1974 shall be deemed to be invalid, so far it
says that the reservation prescribed shall be given effect to in accordance
with a roster to be maintained which will be "implemented in the form of
c
a running account from year to year because the 'running account' is to
operate only till the quota provided under the instruction is reached and D
not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled thereafter
the roster does not survive. [138-D-FJ
Jogi11der Si11gh Sethi v. Punjab Government, (1982) 2 SLR 307, affirmed.
Jaswant Si11gh v. The Secretary to Govt. of Pu11jab, (1989) 4 SLR 257
FB, Overruled.
R.K Sabharwal v. State of Punjab, [1995] 2 SCC 745 and llldra
Sawhney v. Unio11 of llldia, (1992] S!'ppl. 3 SCC 217, relied on.
U11ion of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan, J. T. (1995) 7 SC 231; P.S.
Ghalaut v. State of Haryana, (1995] 5 SCC 625 and Direct Recruit Class II
Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., !1990] 2
sec 715, distinguished.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 37923794 of 1989 ETC.
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.8.89 of the Punjab &
E
F
G
Haryana High Court in C.W.P.No. 2190/85, 7860 & 7861 of 1987.
H
128
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996) 3 S.C.R.
A
M.M. Kumar, Additional Attorney General, Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, R.K.
Jain, D.V. Sehgal, Sunil Gupta, N.D. Garg, Mahabir Singh, Ms. Meenakshi
Arora, H.M. Singal, G.K. Bansal, RS. Suri, S.K. Bisaria, K.K. Gupta, A.
Mariarputham, Pankaj Kalra, (NP), S.C. Birla (NP), E.C. Agrawala, Prem
Malhotra, (NP) Meenakshi Arora, Sanjay Parikh, R.K. Jain, P .. K Kapur,
B Pravcen Jain, S.C: Birla, S.C. Patel, Ejaj Maqbool and Ms. Indu Malhotra
for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
N.P. SINGH, J. These appeals have been filed against the judgment
C of a Full Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dated 23.8.1989
dismissing three writ petitions (C.W.P.No. 2190/88, C.W.P.NO. 7860/87
AND C.W.P.No. 7861/87) filed on behalf of the appellants. The petitioners
in C.W.P.No. 2190 of 1988 were working on the posts of Superintendent
Grade I, Superintendent Grade II and Assistant, in Punjab Civil
D Secretariat, Chandigarh. They were members of the cadre of Punjab Civil
Secretariat. The petitioners in C.W.P.No. 7860 of 1987 were working on
the posts of Under-Secretaries/Superintendent Grade I, in the Punjab Civil
Secretariat, Chandigarh, and were members of the cadre of Punjab Civil
\
Secretariat. The petitiones in C.W.P. No. 7861 of 1987 were working
i
against the posts of Deputy Secretaries/Under Secretaries in the Punjab
E Civil Secretariat and were members of State Service Class-I. The primary
grievance made in all these writ petitions on behalf of the different
petitioners, was that the policy for reservation in respect of candidates
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, was being implemented by the State Government in a manner, because of which the
F
members belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes were
holding posts in excess to their reservation quota. This was not only
prejudicial but detrimental to the right of the petitioners for being considered for promotion to higher grade. Several other similar writ petitions
had also been filed on behalf of others which were heard together and were
dismissed by the common impugned judgment.
G
The State has been issuing from time to time Government Orders in
respect of reservations for members of Scheduled Castes and Backward
Classes. One such order was issued on 19.10.1949, making 15% reservation
of posts in favour of Scheduled Castes to be filled up from amongst
H candidates who held minimum qualification for the posts. By another order
)
.\
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.]
129
dated 19.8.1952, the percentage of 15% was increased to 19%. By yet A
another order, dated 29.1.1959 roster system was introduced for implementing the policy of reservation. By an order dated 14.1.1964 reservation was fixed in all classes of posts i.e., I, II, III and IV. However, by an
order dated 23.8.1966, the State withdrew reservation for Class I and II
posts but the reservation in respect of Class III and IV posts were increased B
to 20% On 19.7.1968 a clarification was issued by the State Government
saying that in direct recruitment the roster points shall be taken as seniority
points for Scheduled Castes. By an order dated 4.5.1974, reservation was
reimposed even in respect of Class I and II posts and it was fJXed at 16%
(14% for Scheduled Castes and 2% for Backward Classes). This reservation was to be provided by applying the roster system. The reservation of C
14% posts for Scheduled Castes was the substantive provisions and the
roster was a machinery provision. By an Order dated 6.6.1974, the quota
of reservation was increased to 25% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for
Backward Classes w.e.f.6.3.1974. On 7.1.1980 the State issued an order, the
relevant part whereof says:-
D
" .... it is made clear that those scheduled castes/Backward classes
employees who get appointed/promoted against reserve points on
the basis of their merit/seniority should not be counted for the
purpose of reservation but that reserve point should be carried
over to the next point on the roster and filled by a can· E
didate/employee belong to Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes so
that the deficiency of representation in service is made up''.
The aforesaid Government Order dated 7.1.1980 was considered by the
High Court in the case of Joginder Singh Sethi v. Punjab Government, F
(1982) 2 SLR 307. The operative part of the judgment of the High Court
IS :
"For working out this percentage the promotees/appointees in
this cadre whether on the basis of reservation or otherwise, have
to be taken notice. In the light of this conclusion or ours we hold
that any promotions of the members of the scheduled Castes and
Backward classes made beyond prescribed limit on the basis of
above noted instructAsrs of the Government are void and nonest''.
G
Civil Appeal Nos. 3326-27 of 1982, which have been heard along with the H
130
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
A present appeals is against the aforesaid judgment of the High Court in the
case of Joginder Singh Sethi (supra). This Court in those appeals on
8.2.1983 pa>Sed an order of stay saying :
B
c
D
E
"We made it clear by our order dated 19.10.82 that there will
be an interim order of stay against reversion of any of the person
already appointed on the basis of instructions issued by the Govt.
of Punjab which have been held to be invalid by the Judgment of
the High Court impugned in these appeals and writ petition. We
do not think that there is any doubt in regard to what we said,
namely that no scheduled castes and scheduled Tribes employees
who has already been appointed or promoted pursuant to the
instructions of the Government of Punjab will not be reverted but
so far as the future appointments/promotions are concerned these
shall be made according to the judgment of the High Court and
these will be ultimately subject to the result of the writ petition
and appeals. If the Govt. makes any appointment/promotions in
accordance with the judgment of the High Court the State Govt.
will make it clear in the letter of appointment/promotion that the
appointment/promotion is subject to the result of the writ petition
and appeal so that there is no difficulty in future in case the High
Court judgment is reversed by this Court.. .... "
So far the appellants are concerned, they took a stand before the High
Court in writ petitions filed on their behalf that when the reservation quota
was complete, the Scheduled Castes candidates should not further be
appointed/promoted. It was said on their behalf that Scheduled Castes and
F
Backward Class candidates who compete on merit, should also be adjusted
against the quota reserved for them, otherwise there shall be increase in
the percentage of the quota reserved for them. The writ petitions were
referred to a Full Bench of the said High Court. Before Full Bench it was
also submitted that Scheduled Castes and Backward Class candidates
cannot be considered for appointment/promotion against general category
G posts in a cadre. The Full Bench however said in the case of Jaswant Singh
v. The Secretary to Gol't. of Punjab, (1989) 4 SLR 257 that non-consideration of Scheduled Castes candidates against general category posts for
purpose of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16
of the Constitution. It also observed that there was no bar to the appointH ment/promotion of larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The
j
-I
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.]
131
members of the Scheduled Castes, appointed on merit or promoted on A
seniority-cum-fitness basis shall not be taken into consideration for working
out the reserved percentage. The High Court also said that roster points
were seniority points. In result the Full Bench over-ruled the view taken by
the same High Court in the aforesaid Joginder Singh Sethi's case. The
conclusion of the Full Bench is :
"Thus, while non-Scheduled Caste candidates are not eligible for
appointment or promotion to the reserved posts at the reserved
point, the Scheduled Castes candidate are eligible to compete with
the general category candidate in respect of the posts which are
B
not reserved and also claim promotion to the same if they are C
otherwise eligible by virtue of seniority and merit and merely
because they happen to be members of the Scheduled Caste, they
cannot be deprived of their right to compete for appointment or
promotion on the basis of seniority and merit that is constitutionally protected under Articles 14 and 16(1)(2) of the Constitution
even when the total number of Scheduled Castes members in that D
cadre holding posts are more than the prescribed percentage.
Secondly, where Scheduled Caste/Backward Class secure an appointment against
11a reserved point" on the basis of his own merit
and seniority and not on the basis of only his being Scheduled
Caste/Backward Class such candidate should not be counted while E
calculating the percentage of reservation meant for Scheduled
Caste/Backward Class, but that reserved point should be carried
over to the next point on the roster and filled by candidates
belonging to Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes. Thirdly,
Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes candidates who are appointed
or promoted on the basis of appropriate reservation under the F
prescribed roster point shall be assigned seniority as per the point
reserved for them in the relevant roster irrespective of their position in the general merit list in case of direct recruitment in Class
I, II, III and IV service. In other words, roster points are the
seniority points in respect of Scheduled Castes Backward Classes.
In the case of Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes candidate get- G
ting selected or promoted on his own merit/seniority, he will retain
his original higher seniority position secured by him. The seniority
cannot be ambivalent and fluctuating.
It was further said :
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
132
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(1996] 3 S.C.R.
"We have already held that reservation does not mean that the
Scheduled Castes candidates are deprived from being considered
for promotion to the general category seats on the basis of
seniority-cum-merit or on the basis of selection on merit. It also
not possible to invoke the principle of reservation not exceeding
50 per cent on the total strength as reaching above 50 per cent is
not by reason of any such reservation as such it so happened that
the candidates who competed for the selection belonged to a
particular category and all of them were found to be suitable on
merit and ability. It has been pointed out in the counter statements
that on a number of occasions previously all these posts were held
by non-Scheduled Castes. But if two Scheduled Castes has already
come purely on merit it is, to be taken as a matter gratifying and
not to be frowned upon. It is only if reservation in effect amounted
to an unreasonable percentage that could if at all be questioned.
The percentage of reserved candidates in this case is only 14 and
if the Scheduled Castes candidates have come and occupied that
position in that cadre on account of their own merit and ability,
the reservation itself could not be questioned and they could not
be deprived of their right to be considered for selection on the
basis of merit and ability. We are, therefore, unable to accept the
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
Scheduled Castes candidates cannot be considered for the vacant
postn.
On the aforesaid findings the different writ petitions were dismissed by a
common judgment as already referred to above.
It may be mentioned that some of the questions raised in the cases
of Joginder Singh Sethi (supra) and Jaswant Singh (supra) came up for
consideration before a Constitution Bench in the case of R.K. Sabharwal
V. State of Punjab, [1995] 2 sec 745, on a writ petition filed by members
of the Punjab Service of Engineers (Class I) in Irrigation Department,
G belonging to the general category challenging the policy of reservation in
connection with promotion to higher posts. The respondents to the said
writ petition were members of the Scheduled Caste. On behalf of the
petitioners in that case a stand was taken that the (i) object of reservation
was to provide adequate representation to the Scheduled Castes!fribes
H and Backward Classes in service and if more than 14% of Scheduled Castes
\
J
AS. JANUJAv. STAIB [N.P. SINGH, J.]
133
candidates are appointed/promoted in a cadre on their own merit/seniority A
by competing with general category candidates then the purpose of reservation in the said cadre having been achieved the Government instructions
in respect of reservation would become inoperative and (ii) once the posts
earmarked for Scheduled Castes(fribes and Backward Classes on the
roster are filled, the reservation is complete and the roster cannot operate
any further and has to be stopped. Any post falling vacant, in the cadre
thereafter is to be filled from category reserved or general-due to retirement etc., of whose members the post fell vacant. In respect of the first
question mentioned above, it was said :
B
"When a percentage of reservation is fixed in respect of a C
particular cadre and the roster indicates the reserve points, it has
to be taken that the posts shown at the reserve points are to be
filled from amongst the members of reserve categories and the
candidates belonging to the general category are not entitled to be
considered for the reserved posts. On the other hand the reserve
category candidates can compete for the non-reserve posts and in D
the event of their appointment to the said posts their number
cannot be added and taken into consideration for working out the
percentage of reservation.
11
It was further said :
"The fact that considerable number of members of a Backward
Class have been appointed/promoted against general seats in the
State Services may be a relevant factor for the State Government
to review the question of continuing reservation for the said class
E
but so long as the instructions/rules providing certain percentage
F
of reservations for the Backward Classes are operative the same
have to be followed. Despite any number of appointees/promotees
belonging to the Backward Classes against the general category
posts the given percentage has to be provided in addition."
In respect of the second question as to whether once the posts earmarked
for Scheduled Castes(fribes and Backward Classes on the roster are filled
and the reservation is complete the roster can operate any further, the
Constitution Bench said :
G
"We see considerable force in the second contention raised by H
A
8
c
D
E
F
134
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
the learned counsel for the petitioners. The reservations provided
under the impugned Government instructions are to be operative
in accordance with the roster to be maintained in each Department. The roster is implemented in the form of running account
from year to year. The purpose of "running account" is to make
sure that the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and Backward
Classes get their percentage of reserved posts. The concept of
"running account" in the impugned instructions has to be so interpreted that it does not result in excessive reservation. "16% of the
posts .... " are reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes and
Backward Classes. ln a lot of 100 posts those falling at Serial
Numbers 1, 7, 15, 22, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 80, 87, and 91 have
been reserved and earmarked in the roster for the Scheduled
Castes. Roster points 26 and 76 are reserved for the members of
Backward Classes. It is thus obvious that when recruitment to a
cadre starts then 14 posts earmarked in the roster are to be filled
from amongst the members of the Scheduled Castes. To illustrate,
first post in a cadre must go to the Scheduled Caste and thereafter
the said class is entitled to 7th, 15th, 22nd and onwards up to 91st
post. When the total number of posts in a cadre are filled by the
operation of the roster then the result envisaged by impugned
instructions is achieved. In other words, in a cadre of 100 posts
when the posts earmarked in the roster for the Scheduled Castes
and the Backward Classes are filled the percentage of reservation
provided for the reserved categories is achieved. We see no justification to oprate the roster thereafter. The "running account" is
to operate only till the quota provided under the impugned instructions is reached and not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled the numerical test of adequacy is satisfied and
thereafter the roster does not survive.
It was said thereafter that vacancies arising in the cadre after the operation
of the roster and the "running account" comes to an end, they have to be
G filled up from amongst category to which posts belonged in the roster. It
was illustrated by saying :
"For example the Scheduled Caste persons holding t.he posts
at roster points 1, 7, 15 retire then these slots are to be filled from
H
amongst the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes. Similarly,
\
i
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH, J.]
135
if the persons holding the post at points 8 to 14 or 23 to 29 retire A
then these slots are to be filled from among the general category.
By following this procedure there shall neither be shortfall nor
excess in the percentage of reservation
11
•
It was also said that the operation of a roster for filling the cadre strength
by itself ensures that reservation remains within 15% limit. It was B,
demonstrated by an illustration as to what shall be the consequences if the
roster is permitted to operate in respect of the vacancies arising after the
total posts in a cadre are filled by saying :
"We may examine the likely result if the roster is permitted to C
operate in respect of the vacancies arising after the total posts in
a cadre are filled. In a 100-point roster, 14 posts at various roster
points are filled from amongst the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe candidates, 2 posts are filled from amongst the Backward
Classes and the remaining 84 posts are filled from amongst the
general category. Suppose all the posts in a cadre consisting of 1()() D
posts are filled in accordance with roster by 31.12.1994. Thereafter
in the year 1995, 25 general category persons (out of 84) retire.
Again in the year 1996, 25 more persons belonging to the general
category retire. The position which would emerge would be that
the SchedUled Castes and Backward Classes would claim 16% E
share out of the 50 vacancies. If 8 vacancies are given to them then
in the cadre of 100 posts the reserve categories would be holding
24 posts thereby increasing the reservation from 16% to 24%. On
the contrary if the roster is permitted to operate till the total posts
in a cadre are filled and thereafter the vacancies falling in the cadre
are to be filled by the same category of persons whose retirement F
etc. caused the vacancies then the balance be!Ween the reserve
category and the general category shall always be maintained.'
Reliance was also placed on the judgment of nine Judges Bench in the case
of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, (1992) Supp. 3 SCC 217 at page 737 G
para 814 where it was said :
'Take a unit/s.ervice/cadre comprising 1000 posts. The reservation in favour of Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes and Other
Backward Classes is 50% which means that out of the 1000 posts
500 must be held by the members of these classes i.e. 270 by other H
A
B
c
D
E
136
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
Backward Classes, 150 by Scheduled Castes and 80 by Scheduled
Tribes. At a given point of time, let us say, the number of members
OBCs in the unit/service/category is only 50, a shortfall of 220.
Similarly the number of members of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes is only 20 and 5 respectively, shortfall of 130 and
75. If the entire service/cadre is taken as a unit and the backlog is
sought to be made up, then the open competition channel has to
be choked altogether for a number of years until the number of
members of all Backward Classes reaches 500, i.e., till the quota
meant for each of them is filled up. This may take quite a number
of years because the number of vacancies arising each year are not
many. Meanwhile, the members of open competition category
would become age-barred and ineligible. Equality of opportunity
in their case would become a mere mirage. It must be remembered
that the equality of opportunity guaranteed by clause {1) is to each
individual citizen of the country while clause ( 4) contemplates
special provision being made in favour of socially disadvantaged
classes. Both must be balanced against each other. Neither should
be allowed to eclipse the other. For the above reason, we hold that
for the purpose of applying the rule of 50% a year should be taken
as the unit and not the entire strength of the cadre, service or the
unit as the case may be''.
The controversy which has been raised in the present appeals is: whether,
after the members of Scheduled Castes/Tribes or Backward Classes for
whom specific percentage of posts have been reserved and roster has been
provided having been promoted against those posts on the basis of 'acF celerated promotion because of reservation of posts and applicabilicy of
the roster system, can claim promotion against general category posts in
still higher grade on the basis of their seniority which itself is the result of
accelerated promotion on basis of reservation and roster? The learned
counsel, appearing for the appellants, took a clear and definite stand that
they have no grievance or objection if members of the Scheduled Castes
G
or Backward Classes, for whom reservation has been made and roster has
been prescribed even in the promotional posts, get accelerated promotions
against those posts. But the question is: whether, on this basis such 'accelerated promotees' from lower grade to higher grade in service can claim
promotion against the general category posts in still higher grade of service
H merely because they had been promoted before the general category
.t
•
y·
A.S.JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,L]
137
candidates, who were senior to them in the lower grade and have been A
promoted later in their turn? In other words, is the benefit of extra seniority
obtained by a reserved category candidate by earlier promotion under the
reservation policy to the reserved post, also available to him for competing
with his otherwise senior general category candidate, who got promoted to
the same cadre later only because. of the reservation policy, for promotion B
to a general category post also in the next higher grade.
The High Court has relied on circulars dated 19.7.1969 and 8.9.1969
for purpose of holding that even after the percentage reserved in a cadre
is filled and the roster is complete, the members of the Scheduled Castes
and Backward Classes can be promoted against general category posts on C
basis of seniority. It may be inentioned that the aforesaid circulars do not
refer anything about reservation in promotional posts or in respect of roster
to be maintained in the form of a "running account". It appears that it was
by oversight that for purpose of coming to the conclusion aforesaid reference has been made to those circulars. However, the circular which is
relevant in this connection is No. 1494-SWI-74/8105 dated 4.5.1974, which D
had been challenged by the appellants before the High Court. The relevant
part whereof is as follows:-
"I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and to say
that at present reservation for Scheduled Castes and Backward E
Classes is applicable in promotions to and within class III and IV
only. Since these Castes/Classes are poorly represented in various
higher services in the State Government, it has been under the
active consideration of the State Government that some reservation
in promotions within higher services as well should be made for
F
them. It has now been decided that except in the case of All India
Services, 16% of the posts to be filled by promotion to or within
Class I and II services under the State Government should be
reserved for members of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes
(14% for members of Scheduled Caste and 2% for members of
Backward Classes) subject to the following conditions:-
G
(a) the persons to be considered must possess the minimum
necessary qualifications, and
(b) they should have a satisfactory record of service.
H
138
A
B
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996)3 S.C.R.
(2). In a lot of 100 vacancies occurring from time to time, those
falling at serial numbers mentioned below should be treated as
reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes:
~~~~~~~s~~~~~~M~w=
Vacancies falling at serial numbers 26 and 76 should be treated as
reserved for the members of Ba.ckward Classes.
(3) The reservation wescribed shall be given effect to in accordance with a roster to be maintained in each Department. The roster
will be implemented in the form of a rnnning account from year to
C
year ......... "
(emphasis supplied)
Before we examine the grievance of the appellants regarding the members
of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, who have been given 'acD celerated promotions' because of'the policy of reservation and applicability
of the roster system, being considered against general category posts in still
higher grade, it will be proper to point out that the aforesaid circular dated
4.5.1974 shall be deemed to be invalid, so far it says that the reservation
prescribed shall be given effect to in accordance with a roster to be
E
maintained which will be 'implemented in the form of a running account
from year to year' because of the judgment of the aforesaid Constitution
Bench of this Court in the case of R.K. Sabharwa/, (supra), the Constitution
Bench has clearly and categorically said that the "running account" is to
operate only till the quota provided under the instruction is reached and
not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled thereafter
F
the roster does not survive. As such there is no question of implementing
the roster in the form of 'running account' from year to year as provided
in the circular dated 4.5.1974.
In view of the judgment of this Court in the case of R.K Sabharwa/
(supra) that a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes who
G
enters in service by process of direct recruitment and is appointed on his
own merit belongs to a class different from the class who are appointed at
the initial stage or are promoted thereafter, applying the principle of
reservation and system of roster, the appellants now cannot make any
grievance if a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class, who has
H
entered into service on his own merit having competed with the general
f
'
A.S.JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.]
139
category candidates, is considered and promoted in the higher grade on A
the posts which are in the general category because of his seniority and
-~
merit. The rub is as to whether the members of the Scheduled Castes or
Backward Class who have been appointed/promoted on basis of the policy
of reservation and system of roster can also claim. to be promoted against
general category posts in higher grade on basis of their 'accelerated B
promotions'. The appellants have also no objection if accelerated promotions in still higher grade posts are given to such appointees/promotees
applying the roster system i.e. against the posts reserved for them till the
period of five years fixed by this Court in the case of India Sawhney (supra)
i
expires. But whether such appointees/promotees can claim promotion
against general category posts in the higher grade, on basis of their c
seniority in the lower grade having been achieved because of the accelerated promotion or appointment by applying the roster.
In R.K. Sabharwa/'s case, this Court has treated the members of the
Scheduled Castes and Backward -Classes in two categories i.e. those who D
are appointed or promoted having competed with general category candidates on merit and those who are appointed/promoted on basis of
y
reservation and roster. For those who _have competed on merit it has been
held that their number is not to be taken into consideration while working
out the percentage of reservation. In respect of those members of
S.cheduled Castes and Backward Classes, who have been apE
pointed/promoted on the basis of reservation and roster, it has been said
in clear and unequivocal terms that tile "running account" shall stop after
the quota provided under the instructions is reached and the roster cannot
be operated thereafter. In other words, there is no question of promoting
-\"•
further number of such candidates, who have been appointed/promoted on F
the basis of reservation and roster.
If the contention of the respondents is accepted as has been done by
the High Court that such appointees/promotees can be considered against
posts meant for general category candidates merely because they ha:;e
G
become senior on basis of accelerated promotions then, according to us,
•
that exercise .shall amount to circumventing the judgment of the Constitution Bench of this Court in the Sabharwa/' case, because for all practical
purposes the promotions of such candidates are being continued like a
running account although the percentage of reservation provided for them
has been reached and achieved. Once such reserved percentage has been H
140
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996] 3 S.C.R.
A achieved and even the operation of the roster has stopped, then how it will
be permissible to consider such candidates for being promoted against the
general category posts on the basis of their accelerated promotion, which
has been achieved by reservation and roster.
B
c
D
E
F
Recently, this Court in the case of Union of India v. Virpal Singh
Chauhan, J.T. (1995) 7 SC 231 = [1995] 6 SCC 684, Mr. Justice B.P. Jeevan
Reddy, speaking for the Court, has said:
"Hence, the seniority between the reserved category candidates
and general candidates in the promoted category shall continue to
be governed by their panel position. We have discussed hereinbefore the meaning of the expression "panel" and held that in case
of non-selection posts, no
11panel" is prepared or is necessary to be
prepared. If rn, the question arises, what did the circular/letter
dated August 31, 1982 mean when it spoke of seniority being
governed by the panel position? In our opinion, it should mean
the panel prepared by the selecting authority at the time of selection for Grade 'C'. It is the seniority in this panel which must be
reflected in each of the higher grades. This means that while the rule
of reservation gives accelerated promotion, it does not give the
accelerated - or what may be called, the consequential - seniority."
It has been further said:
"In other words, even if a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe
candidate is promoted earlier by virtue of rule of reservation/roster
than his senior general candidate and the senior general candidate
is promoted later to the said higher grade, the general candidate
regains his seniority over such earlier promoted Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate. The earlier promotion of the
Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate in such a situation does
not confer upon him seniority over the general candidate even though
G
the general candidate is promoted later to that category."
It was also said:
"It is true that this case presents a rather poignant turn of
events. Of the thirty three candidates being considered for eleven
H
vacancies, all are Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates.
}
i
y
AS.JANUJAv. STATE[N.P.SINGH,J.]
141
Not a single candidate among them belongs to general category. A
The learned counsel for the respondent is justified in complaining
that appellants have failed to explain how such a situation has come
about. Not only the juniors are stealing a march over their seniors
but the march is so rapid that not only erstwhile compatriots are left
far behind but even the persons who were in the higher categories at B
the time of entry of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates
in the service have also been left behind. Such a configuration could
not certainly have been intended by the framers of the Constitution
or the framers of the rules of reservation. In the absence of any
explanation from the authorities, the best we can do is to ascribe
it as faulty implementation of the rule of reservation. In other C
words, not only have the Railways not observed the principle that
the reservation must be vis-a-vis posts and not vis-a-vis vacancies
but they had also not kept in mind the rule of seniority in the
promotion posts enunciated in the Railway Board's circulars
referred to supra. Yet another principle which the authorities D
appeared to have not observed in practice is that once the percentage reserved for a particular reserved category is satisfied in
that service category or grade (unit of appointment) the rule of
reservation and the roster should no longer be followed. Because
of the breach of these three rules, it appears the unusual situation
complained of by the general candidates has come to pass.