A
DHANNARAM
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
APRIL 18, 1996
B
[K. RAJvlASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, J.J.J
Seivice Law :
Selection and appointment as Goods Clerks and Coaching C/e1*s from
~ c/ass-fV employee.1--Ceitain posts resc1ved for Scheduled Castes-Some SC
.....
candidates selected on the general standard 1vhilc so111e others selected in the
remred quota with relaxed standards-Appellant selected on relaxed stand-
ards-However, the conununication to hi111 14•rongly n1e11tioncd that he was
selected on general standards-Subsequently the nJistake •vas con·ected and
he 1vas put in the order of 1ne1it under rese11•ed quota-Could not be ap-
D pointed as no vacancy e:xisted under the rese1ved quota-Hence direction
crmnot be given for his appointment-List e>.pired by efflux of time-Direc-
tions sought for O]Jpointnient in future vacancies-CG1111ot be given-Re.\·e1va-
tion for SC/ST in appointment promotion.
E
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7536 of
1996.
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.3.95 of the Central Ad-
ministration Tribunal, Chandigarh in 0.A. No. 308-HR of 1994.
F
Prem Malhotra for the Appellant.
G
P.P. Rao, Raj Kumar Gupta, Rajesh, H.P. Sharma, A. Bhasme and
K. Swami for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted. Heard learned counsel on both sides.
This appeal by special leave arises from the Order of the Central
Administrative Tribunal at Chandigarh made in 0.A. No. 308 of 1994 on
March 21,1995. Though the Tribunal has dismissed the 0.A. on the ground
H of delay, we have examined the matter on merits. It is now clear from the
564
DHANNARAMv. U.0.1.
565
record placed by the respondents that as a result of selection, list was A
prepared on April 4, 1990 for appointment as Goods Clerks and Coaching
Clerks from among the class IV employees in the order of merit from the
quota reserved for class IV employees. Out of them they also made
reservation to the members of the Scheduled Castes. The appellant belongs
to the Scheduled Castes. Candidates at item Nos. 17 and 32 of the list also
belong to the Scheduled Castes and were superior in the order of merit;
they were selected on the general standard to the roster point as against
those who were selected in the reserved quota with relaxed staudards. The
appellant stands at No. 2 while one Sarvan Kumar stands at No. 1 of the
list of reserved quota. It is true that in the communication sent to the
appellant it was mentioned that he was selected on general standards. It
would appear that subsequently, they realised the mistake and corrected
the same and put him in the order of merit as a candidate for the reserved
quota. Since there was no vacancy exi,ting for reserved quota, he could not
B
c
be appointed. Under those circumstances, we cannot give any direction for
making his appointment. Since the list has already expired by efflux of D
time, the directions sought for appointment in the future vacancies cannot
be given. But this order does not preclude him from consideration for
future promotion in any of the vacancies that would arise subsequent to
the earlier selection.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
E
G .N.
Appeal dismissed.
Lex