S.S. GREWAL versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Citation: [1993] 3 S.C.R. 593 · Decided: 07-05-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. SAWANT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

S.S. GREWAL 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 
MAY7, 1993 
[P.B. SA WANT AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ] 
Civil Services Punjab S11perior Judicial Sen1ice Rules, 1963 Rule 8A and 
Goi1ernment of Punjab Communication dated June 6, 1974, November 9, 1974; 
May 5, 1975 and April 8, 1980-Reservation for Mazhbi Sikhs and 
Balmikis-lmplementation of insimctions- Preparation of roster-Inter se 
seniority of General Ca1eg01ycandidare and Mazhbi S~klt tltrouglt direct recruit-
ment. 
. Recruitment to the Punjab Superior Judicial Service was governed by 
th«' Punjab Superior Judicial Senice Rules, 1963. Rule 8-A inserted in the 
said rules by notification dated June 14, 1977 provided that instructions 
issue(; by the State Government from time to time in relation to reservation 
of appointments tor posts for Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes were 
applicable for appointments to posts in the Service. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
The Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Welfare of Scheduled 
Castes ~.nd Backward Classes Department by letter dated June 6, 1974 
E 
informed all Heads of Department etc. that it had been decided to increase the 
percen:lage of reservation in direct recruitment in all services from 20 % to 
25% in the case of members of Scheduled Castes and from 2% to 5% in the 
case of members belonging to Backward Classes, and indicated the vacancies 
to be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes in a lot of 100 vacancies 
and specified the points. It also directed that the Roster already existing 
F 
would not be abandoned, but would now be maintained in continuation from 
the vacancy in the existing Roster last fdled up according to the new pattern 
of reservation. 
Circular dated November 19, 1974 made provision for carrying for· 
ward of reservation for members of Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes, 
and directed that the reservation should be carried forward form vacancy to 
vacancy in the same block until a Scheduled Caste or a Backward Class 
person is appointed or promoted in the same block, and that the reservation 
should be carried from Yacancy to vacancy in each block and from block to 
G 
block until the carried forward vacancies are filled up. 
H 
593 
594 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1993] 3 S.C.R 
A 
B~· letter dated May 5, 1975 the Secretary to the Go\'ernment, Welfare 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Department Communicated to all Heads of Department.; that the Govern-
ment has decided tr.at henceforth, 50% \'acancies of the quota reserved for 
Scheduled Castes should be oftered to Balmikis and Mazhbi Sikhs as a first 
preference from amongst the Scheduled Castes candidates. 
The Under Secretary, Welfare Department Resenation Cell by his 
letter dated April 8,1980, clarified the position with regard to the implemen-
tation of instructions regarding reservation for Mazhbi Sikhs and Balmikis 
contained in the aforesaid letter dated May 5, 1975, the Clarification was to 
the efl'cct that : (1) the combined merit list can be disturbed while gh'ing 
appointment to the candidate belonging to Balmikis and Mazhbi Sikhs; (ii) the 
first reserved \'acancy c-.tn be offered to Balmikis and Mazhbi.Sikhs although 
their name may be below in the merit list, and (iii) on the basis of 50% 
reser\•ation Balmikis and Mazhbi Sikhs 1,3,5 and so on reser,·ed \'acancics 
shall go to the candidates of these castes if available and 2,4,6 and so on 
reserved vacancies shall go to other Scheduled Castes candidates. 
After introduction of Rule 8-A in the Punjab Superior .Judicial Service 
Rules, four persons were appointed by way of direct recruitment to the 
Service in the year 1979. One of them, Shri Balwant Rai, belonged to a 
Scheduled Caste (other then Balmikis or Mazhbi Sikhs). Thereafter, in 1981 
one post fell vacant but no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste could be 
selected and candidate belo~ging to general category was appointed against 
the said post. In 1982, selection was made for two posts but only one person 
could be selected and he also belonged to the general category and no person 
belonging to a Scheduled Caste was available for appointment. In 1986, six 
persons including the appellant and respondent No. 3 were appointed on the 
basis of direct recruitment. Out of those six persons, four belonged to the 
general category and two belonged to Scheduled Castes; One of the two 
persons wa~ Shri G.S. Samra who belonged to a Scheduled Caste other than 
Balmikis or Mazhbi Sikh. In the merit list for the said se.lection the appellant 
was p

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