RAM BHAGAT SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

Citation: [1990] 2 S.C.R. 329 · Decided: 04-04-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SABYASACHI MUKHERJI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

RAM BHAGAT SINGH AND ANR. 
A 
v 
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. 
APRIL 4, 1990 
[SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ, K.N. SAIKIA AND 
B 
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 (As adapted 
by Haryana State): Part C-Rule 8-Haryana Judicial Service 
Examination-Prescription of 55% marks in aggregate for qualifying-
Whether results in denial of equality of opportunity to scheduled castes/ 
scheduled tribes candidates. 
Constitution of India: Articles 14, 15, 16 & 38-Haryana Judicial 
Service Examination-Fixation of 55% marks in aggregate for qualify-
ing-Whether results in denial of equality of opportunity to scheduled 
castes/scheduled tribes candidates. 
Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch Rules, 1951, 
as adapted by the State of Haryana, lays down that uo candidate shall 
be considered to have qualified in the examination unless he obains at 
least 55% marks in the aggregate of all papers, including the viva-voce 
c 
0 
test. 
E 
The petitioners assailed the said provision on the ground that 
""--
fixation of 55% marks has resulted in denial of equality of opportunity 
to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes segments of the community 
vis-a-vis general candidates for detennining their suitability and/or eligi-
bility for appointment in the judicial branch of the Haryana Civil 
F 
Services in the absence of lower percentage having been prescribed for 
f 
them as in other States. 
Disposing of the writ petition and the appeal, the Court, 
HELD: J. Public services and public employment do not exist for 
providing jobs in terms of equality or otherwise to all. Only public 
services and public employment must serve public purpose and nothing 
that hampers or impairs the efficiency or efficacy of public services 
should be permitted in ensuring conditions of constitutional equality. 
These should be done objectively, rationally and reasonably. 
329 
G 
H 
A 
B 
330 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1990] 2 S.C.R. 
2. Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes for reasons historical or 
otherwise, are unequal with the general members of the community in 
respect of ability and qualification for public employment. They are 
unable to compete in terms of absolute equality with the members of 
other communities or grou_ps in the society. Hence, in order to make 
them compete on conditions of equality with others in respect of jobs and 
employments of the State certain relaxations and other factors ensuring 
equality are imperative. Our Constitution so enjoins it. Article 38 of the 
Constitution read with Article 14, 15 and 16 so mandates it. [332D-E; C] 
3. In the instant ,case, high efficiency is required because the 
recruitment is in the judicial branch, that is to say, for prospective 
c judicial officers who will be in charge of administration of justice in the 
country. But at the same time, if possible, in order to ensure that there 
is equality of opportunity, a percentage should be fixed which without, 
in any way, compromising with the efficiency required for the job 
which will be attainable by backward communities, that is to say, 
scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. Unless such a percentage is fixed 
D on the aforesaid basis and a percentage is fixed for qualification which 
would normally be unattainable by the scheduled castes and scheduled 
tribes determined on an objective basis, it would not he possible to 
ensure equality of opportunity. [333D-F] 
4.1 The Government is directed to make a conscious decision 
E 
objectively before the !lext selections take place, and determine a 
minimum percentage of marks consistent with efficiency and the need 
for ensuring equality of opportunity to scheduled castes and scheduled 
tribes. !334Br 
4.2 The Government should also consider whether further re-
f 
laxation in age in favour of schedu1ed castes and scheduled tribes can he 
made; and if so, to what extent without hampering efficiency of the 
administration. This should also he considered before the next selec-
tions for appointment to the post are made. [334C] 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. fl47 
G 
of 1988. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) 
WITH 
H 
Civil Appeal No. 1782 of 1990. 
_.A. 
' 
...... -
-..__ . 
t 
R.B. SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA [MUKHARJI, J.] 331 
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.6.1987 of the Punjab and 
HaryanaHighCourtin C.W.P. No. 1313of 19Mo 
R. Venkataramani, Mahabir Singh, M.S. Ganesh and C.M. 
Nayar for the Appearing Parti

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