R. R. INAMDAR versus STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 14 S.C.R. 505 · Decided: 28-11-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
505
R. R. INAMDAR
v.
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No 1495 of 2016)
NOVEMBER 28, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Service Law: Reservation – Solitary post – Appellant-teacher
belonged to Scheduled Caste – Fifth respondent-teacher was senior
to her – When a post of Lecturer in English fell vacant, appellant
was promoted to the said post on the basis of roster points – Fifth
respondent challenged the appointment before High Court – High
Court held that the post of Lecturer in English was a solitary post
and that the appellant could not have been appointed to the post
on the basis of reservation and the fifth respondent who was senior
to the appellant had a valid claim and entitlement to the post – On
appeal, held: There can be no reservation of a solitary post and
that in order to apply the rule of reservation within a cadre, there
must be a plurality of posts – Where there is no interchangeability
of the posts in different disciplines, each single post in a particular
discipline has to be treated as a single post for the purpose of
reservation within the meaning of Art.16(4) of the Constitution –
There was no error in the judgment of High Court – Prayer of the
appellant that she continued to work as a Lecturer in English since
her appointment in 2002 and during the pendency of appeal, she
was also protected by an order of status quo; that the proposal of
the management to the State of Karnataka for her appointment to a
second post was not acceded to – In view of the prayer of the
appellant, the State of Karnataka is requested to consider the matter
afresh – Since the appellant has been working as a Lecturer in
English since 2002, no recovery be made from her for the period
during which she has worked – As regards the fifth respondent, her
pay shall be fixed notionally for the purpose of computing the salary
which will be payable to her effective from the date of her joining
as Lecturer in English and in the ultimate computation of her retiral
dues on the date on which she attains superannuation – Fifth
 [2019] 14 S.C.R. 505
505
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
506
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 14 S.C.R.
respondent to be considered for promotion in pursuance of the
directions issued by the High Court expeditiously – Constitution of
India – Art.16(4) – Reservation.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. There can be no reservation of a solitary post
and that in order to apply the rule of reservation within a cadre,
there must be a plurality of posts. Where there is no
interchangeability of the posts in different disciplines, each single
post in a particular discipline has to be treated as a single post
for the purpose of reservation within the meaning of Article 16(4)
of the Constitution. If this principle were not to be followed,
reservation would be in breach of the ceiling governed by the
decisions of this Court. A circular cannot take away the binding
effect of the decisions of this Court interpreting the policy of
reservation in the context of Article 16(4). [Paras 9 and 10][511-
A-C]
2. The State of Karnataka is requested to consider afresh
the request of the management for the creation of an additional
post if such a request falls within the parameters of the rules or
regulations of the State of Karnataka. In the event that it is not
possible for the State of Karnataka to create another post under
its rules and regulations, the State of Karnataka shall consider,
in the alternative, the creation of a supernumerary post for such
period until a substantive post is made available, having regard
to the fact that the fifth respondent is due to attain the age of
superannuation. [Para 12][511-F-G]
3. Since the appellant has continued to work as a Lecturer
in English since 28 September 2002, it would be appropriate to
direct that no recovery should be made from the appellant for
the period during which she has worked. Insofar as the fifth
respondent is concerned, her pay shall be fixed notionally for the
purpose of computing the salary which will be payable to her
effective from the date of her joining as Lecturer in English and
in the ultimate computation of her retiral dues on the date on
which she attains superannuation. The fifth respondent shall be
considered for promotion in pursuance of the directions issued
by the High Court expeditiously. [Paras 13 and 14][511-H; 512-
A-C]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
507
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and
Research v. Faculty Association (19

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