JARNAIL SINGH & ORS versus LACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA & ORS

Citation: [2022] 19 S.C.R. 711 · Decided: 28-01-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L. NAGESWARA RAO · Disposal: Directions issued

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 23 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
711
JARNAIL SINGH & ORS.
v.
LACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.629 of 2022)
JANUARY 28, 2022
[L. NAGESWARA RAO, SANJIV KHANNA AND
B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Constitution of India, 1950 – Arts.16(4), 16(4-A), 16(4-B)
and 335 – Reservation in promotion – Collection of quantifiable
data regarding inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs –
Yardstick for arriving at quantifiable data – In M. Nagaraj case the
key issue that was identified and decided by the Supreme Court
was whether any constitutional limitation mentioned in Art.16(4)
and Art.335 stood obliterated by the constitutional amendments
resulting in Arts. 16(4-A) and 16(4-B) – The Supreme Court upheld
the constitutional amendments – The amendments were held to be
enabling provisions – It was observed that the State is not bound to
make reservation for SCs and STs in matters of promotion, however,
if it wishes to exercise its discretion, the State has to collect
quantifiable data showing the backwardness of the class and
inadequacy of representation of that class in public employment, in
addition to compliance with Art.335 of the Constitution – What is
the yardstick by which, according to M. Nagaraj case, one would
arrive at quantifiable data showing inadequacy of representation
of SCs and STs in public employment – Held: Laying down of criteria
for determining the inadequacy of representation would result in
curtailing the discretion given to the State Governments – In addition,
the prevailing local conditions, which may require to be factored
in, might not be uniform – Moreover, in M. Nagaraj case, the Court
made it clear that the validity of law made by the State Governments
providing reservation in promotions shall be decided on a case-to-
case basis for the purpose of establishing whether the inadequacy
of representation is supported by quantifiable data – Therefore, no
yardstick can be laid down by the court for determining the adequacy
of representation of SCs and STs in promotional posts for the
purpose of providing reservation – Reservation.
   [2022] 19 S.C.R. 711
711
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
712
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 19 S.C.R.
Constitution of India, 1950 – Arts.16(4), 16(4-A), 16(4-B)
and 335 – Reservation in promotion – Collection of quantifiable
data regarding inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs – Unit
for collecting quantifiable data – In M. Nagaraj case the key issue
that was identified and decided by the Supreme Court was whether
any constitutional limitation mentioned in Art.16(4) and Art.335
stood obliterated by the constitutional amendments resulting in Arts.
16(4-A) and 16(4-B) – The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional
amendments – The amendments were held to be enabling provisions
– It was observed that the State is not bound to make reservation
for SCs and STs in matters of promotion, however, if it wishes to
exercise its discretion, the State has to collect quantifiable data
showing the backwardness of the class and inadequacy of
representation of that class in public employment, in addition to
compliance with Art.335 of the Constitution – What is the unit with
respect to which quantifiable data showing inadequacy of
representation is required to be collected – Held: In M. Nagaraj
case, the Supreme Court approved that the percentage of reservation
in promotions was to be applied to the entire cadre strength, as held
in R.K. Sabharwal case – While doing so, the court in M. Nagaraj
made it clear that the unit for operation of the roster would be the
cadre strength – Before providing for reservation in promotions to
a cadre, the State is obligated to collect quantifiable data regarding
inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs – Collection of
information regarding inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs
cannot be with reference to the entire service or ‘class’/‘group’ but
it should be relatable to the grade/category of posts to which
promotion is sought – Cadre, which should be the unit for the purpose
of collection of quantifiable data in relation to the promotional
post(s), would be meaningless if data pertaining to representation
of SCs and STs is with reference to the entire service – Reservation.
Constitution of India, 1950 – Arts.16(4), 16(4-A), 16(4-B)
and 335 – Reservation in promotion – Quantifiable data regarding
representation of SCs and STs – Proportionate representation as
test of adequacy – In M. Nagaraj case the key issue that was identified
and decided by the Supreme Court was whether any cons

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.