LexC. A. RAJENDRAN versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
C. A. RAJENDRAN A .,, UNION OF INDIA & ORS. September 29, 1967 (K. N. WANCHOO, C.J., R. S. BACHAWAT, V. RAMASWAMI, B • G. K. MITTER AND K. S. HEGDE, JJ.J Constitution of India, Arts. 14 and 16(4)-Whether Art. 16(4) confers a right on scheduled castes and tribes or onlv an enabling provision-Provision made for no re.servation of posts for backward classes in Class I and II posts only m lower class services-whether C discriminatory. By an office mamorandum of the Central Government issued on the 4th January 1957, in respect of posts filled by promotion through competitive examinations limited to departmental candi- dates, reservations at 121% and 51% of vacancies were provided for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively. By an earlier D office memorandum of the 7th May 1955, in regard to promotions on the basis of seniority subject to fitness and those by selection, no reservations were provided but certain concessions w,ere allowed to members of the backward classes. After the decision of the SuP- reme Court in the case of the General Manager, Southern Railway v. Rdngachari, [1962] 2 S.C.R. 586, the matter was reviewed by the Central Government and it was advised that there was no consti- tutional compulsion to make reservations for Scheduled Castes and E Scheduled Tribes in posts filled by promotion and the question whe- ther the reservation should be continued or withdrawn was entirely a matter of public policy. Subsequent to the review; by a further office memotandum issued on the 8th November 1963 the Govern- ment notified its decision inter alia, that there would be no reserva- tion for Scheduled Cast,g and Scheduled Tribes in appointments made by promotions to Class I and II services as these. required a 1 higher degree of efficiency and responsibility; but that such reserva- tions would continue in certain grades and savices in Class III and Class IV. The petitioner was a class III employee of the Railway Board .Secretariat ~ervice and claimed promotion to the post of a Section Officer m Class II on the basis of the provision for reservations made in the Government's Memorandum of Janu- G ary 4, 1957. By a writ petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution he challenged the latest office memorandum of November 8 1963 and prayed for a restoration with retrospective effect of the office memo- r~nda issued.on M"Y: 7, 1,955 and January 4, 1957. It was contended on his behalf, inter alta (!) that the impugned order violated the guar~tee given to the backward classes under Art. 16(4) of the Constitution; Art. 16( 4) was not an exception engrafted on Art 16 but was in itself a fundamental right granted to the Sched~led B Castes and S~heduled Tri~es .. (i.i) that the order Vi'8S discriminatory, becau~ (~) 1t m~de a d1scnmma\Jon by making provision for re- serv!llion m cert&u1 types !Jf Class III and Class IV services only and not m Class II and I Sel'Vlces, (b) reservation was kept within Class III _ai:>d Class IV for appointments for which there was direct re- cruitment and for promotions made by (!) selection, or (2) on the 721 722 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1968) 1 A.C.R. A result of a competitive examination limited to departmental candi- dates, but no reservation was provided for in respect of apPoint- ments made by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness; and (c) there was discrimination tetween the employees belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled. Tribes in the Railway Service and similar employees in the Central Secretariat Service on the ground that a competitive departmental examination for promotion to the grade of Section Officers was not held by the Railway Board for B the years 1955-63 but such an examination was held for the Central Secretariat Service and 74 employees b~longing to the Scheduled· Castes and Sclleduled Tribes secured the benefit of the provisions for reservation. Held: (i) Article 16(4) does not confer any right on the peti- tioner and there is no constitutional duty imposed on the Govern- ment to make a reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled C Tribes, either at the initial sta~ of recruitment or at the stage of promotion. Article 16(4) is an enabling provision and confers a discretionary power on the State to make a reservation of appoint- me11ts in favour of a backward class of citizens which, in its opinion, is not adequately represented in the Services of the State [734 B-D]. General Manager; S
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.