N. K. CHAUHAN & ORS . versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 1037 · Decided: 01-11-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.N. BHAGWATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 12 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

\ 
1037 
N. K. CHAUHAN & ORS . 
A 
• 
v. 
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. 
November I, 1976 
[P. N. BHAGWATI,.V. R. KRISHNA IYER ANDS. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, 
JJ.] 
B 
Constitution of 
India-Articles 
14-16-Civil 
Service-Seniority-Direct 
Recruits and Promotees-Quota-Whether roster implicit-Benefit of Service-
Wor~~& Phrases-"As far as ptacticab/e". 
The appellants are the promotee Deputy Collectors in the State of Gujarat. 
The conlf'sting respondents are the direct r ~cruits to the parent cadre of Deputy 
Collectors. 
7 Deputy Collectors who are the contesting respondents 
in 
this 
C 
appeal and who were directly recruited as Deputy Collectors in and after 1963 
claimed that they were senior to the appellants who were the promotees pro-
moted as Ueputy Collectors between the years 1960 and 1963 by tiling a Writ 
Petition in the High Court. The routine source of recruitment to the posts of 
Deputy Collectors used to be Mamlatdars who were promoted as Deputy Collec-
tors. In 1939, direct recruitment policy was also evolved for this post. By an 
order of 1941 the mode of determining seniority bdween direct recruits 
and 
promotees was settled. As far as the direct recruits were 
concerned, 
their 
seniority was to run from the date of their appointment on probation and in the 
D 
case of promotees such service was to begin with 
promotion in substantive 
vacancy if continued without break. During the year 1950 to 1959 the direct 
recruitment was discontinued. 
By the Bombay Government Re"olutinn dated 
30-7-1959, the mode of direct recruitment was again started and the proportion 
in which the recruitment from the two sources, namely, the direct recruits and 
the promotees, was fixed as 50 : 50 as far as practicable. 
On 1-5-1960, the Bombay State was bifurcated into 
Gujarat and 
Maha-
E 
rashtra. 
On 1-5-1960, a circular was issued by the Gujarat Government adopt-
ing the rules, resolutions, notifications etc. of the Bombay State. 
By a further 
clarificatory resolution dated 27-5-1960 Gujorat Government provided that 
nothing contained in the circular dated 1-5-1960 shall apply to appointments of 
officers, authorities or persons which may be made by the Government on or 
after 1-S-1960. 
During the year 1959-62, no direct recruitment was made but 
many promotions were effected. 
The Writ Petition filed by the direct recruits 
was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court. The Divi,ion 
Bench of the High Court, however, accepted the appeal of the contesting 
F 
respondents. 
In an appeal by Special Leave the appellants contended : 
1. The expression 'as fai;. as practicable' in the resolution of 1959 pro-
v.ides a sensible safety valve. Therefore,, t~e rule is neither excep-
t10n-proof ngr abstractly absolute but reahsttc and flexibly true to life. 
2. The mandate of equality in Articles 14 and 16 does not require push-
G 
ing down the promotees in the seniority list in the fact of their actual 
service and legal appointment. 
3. Rotation is not implicit in quota. Quota without rotation 
is 
also 
ren,onnble and constitutional at< mu~h as ouota with ro•a•ion. 
The 
choice, both being permissible and fair, is left to the Administration. 
4. The contesting respondents contended 
(i) The ru1e of Jaw is the enemy of ·arbitrary absolutism and the dis-
cretion to dis0bey is a doctrine of despotism 
and cannot be 
subscribed to by a Court. 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
1038 
(ii) 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1977] 1 S.C.R. 
'As far as practicable' does not pennit the State to deviate from 
it. It merely authorises. provisional variations or adlboc solutions 
or emergency arrangements to meet the difficulty of the Adminis-
tration without making formal or regular appointments to the posts 
in question. 
(iii) Rotational system is implicit in quota. 
(iv) Any deviation from rotational system is violative of Articles 
14 
and 16 of the Constitution. 
Allowing the appeal held : 
1. The State in tune with the mandate of the quota rule must make 
serious effort• to secure hands to fill half the number of Vai:tncies 
from the open market. If it does not succeed despite honest and 
serious effort, it qualifies for departure from the rule. If it has be-
come non-feasible, impracticable to get the requisite quota af direct 
recruits having done all that it could, it was free to fill the post by 
promotion of suitable hands, if the filling up of the vacancies was 
administratively necessary and could not wait. 
The 
sen-e 
of 
the 
rule

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