LexG. SRINIVAS RAO versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] 9 S.C.R. 313 "' I , G. SRINIVAS RAO A v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 1911 of 2006) 'f JULY 19, 2011 B ' [R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] Service Law: Indian Police Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954: c rr. 3 and 5 read with clause (2) of Para 3 of Letter dated 31.5.1985 - Cadre allocation - Claim of a general category candidate that allocation of the OBC candidate, who was much below hitn in merit list, to Andhra Pradesh Cadre was 0 unjust and instead he should have been allocated to the. Andhra Pradesh Cadre and not to Manipur-Tripura Joint Cadre - HELD: It is reiterated_fh9t the roster system ensures equitable treatment to both the general candidates and reserved candidates and, thereore, the roster system cannot E be by-passed on some ground or the other which may result in unfair treatment to either general candidates or reserved candidates in violation of their right to equality under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution - Nonetheless, in the instant case, the claimant was a/located to the Manipur- Tripura F Cadre on 27. 07. 1999 and was intimated about such a/location by letter dated 02.10.1999 - Instead of challenging the allocations made in 1999 at the earliest, he filed the O.A. " " before the Tribunal only in 2001 by which time the 36 candidates including the OBC candidate concerned, who had G been selected and appointed to the /PS on the basis of Civil Services Examination, 1998 and had been allocated to different cadres, had already joined their respective cadres and undertaken training in their respective States, and any 313 H 314 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 9 S.C.R. A order of the Tribunal or the Court granting relief to the claimant will disturb the allocation of several members of the /PS - High Court was right in taking a view that no relief can be granted to the claimant on the ground of delay on his part in moving the Tribunal - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 8 14 and 16(1) - Delay/Laches - Central Government letter dated 31.5.1985 - Para 3(2). The appellant, a general category candidate, who secured 95th rank in the Civil Services Examination, 1998 c conducted by the Union Public Service Commission, was appointed to the IPS and was allocated to the Manipur-Tripura Joint Cadre on 27.10.1999. Respondent No.4, an OBC candidate, who secured 133rd rank in the said Examination, was appointed to the IPS and was o allocated to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre on 27.07.1999. The appellant filed an O.A. before the Central Administrative Tribunal in 2001, contending that instead of respondent no.4 he should have been allocated to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre and that the allocation of E respondent no.4 to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre was bad in law, unjust and unsustainable. Union of India, in its additional affidavit, stated that a total number of 36 vacancies in the IPS were to be filled up on the basis of the Civil Services Examination, 1998 out of which 21 F vacancies were to be filled up by general candidates, 10 vacancies were to be filled up by OBC candidates and 5 by SC/ST candidates. However, as per allocation, the total number of vacancies for general candidates worked out to be 23 instead of 21 and total number of vacancies for G OBC candidates worked out to be 8 instead of 10 and, therefore, 2 vacancies for general candidates had to be converted to 2 vacancies for OBC candidates. It was further stated that as the relevant data for the last five years in respect of OBC candidates was not available on H - • '. G. SRINIVAS RAO v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 315 28.05.1999 when the entire exercise of allocation was A completed ana approved by the competent authority, the earlier advice of the Department of Personnel and Training was followed and two general vacancies from the first two States in the alphabetical order, one from the Andhra Pradesh Cadre and one from the Assam- B Meghalaya Joint Cadre, were converted to OBC vacancies and the result was that respondent no.4 was allocated to the OBC vacancy of Andhra Pradesh Cadre. The Tribunal dismissed the application of the appellant. His writ petition was also dismissed by the High Court. C Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. Rule 3 of the IPS (Cadre) Rules, 1954 provides that each State and a group of States will have a State cadre or Joint Cadre respectively of the IPS; and D Rule 5 provides that the Central Government in con
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.