LexSMT. SWATI AND ORS. versus SH. DAMODAR ANANT KARANDIKAR AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
SMT. SWAT! AND ORS. A v. SH. DAMODAR ANANT KARANDIKAR AND ORS. MAY 8, 1996 [A.M. AHMADI, C.J. AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] B Se1Vice Law : Bombay Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulations, 1977: Regulation 13 and Explanatory Memorandum, Para 2. C Reservation in Promotion-Class Ill and IV posts-Percentage.of-SC and ST employees-Initial recruitment-Fixed as 7% for SC and 9% for ST-Held : percentage of reservation for SC and ST in Class Ill and IV promotional posts was 15% and 7 112% respectively and not that which applied at the time of initial recruitme/ll-Major P01t Trust Act, 1963, S.24(1)(a)-Brochure on "Rese1Vation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled D Tribes in Se1vices'~ Ch. 2, para 2.1 (ii) & (iii) and Appendix 3. Pro1notion--Orders of Central Govemnient for reservation for SC and ST in promotional post;~Applicability of-Held: applicable not only for class Ill and IV posts but also to class I and II posts-non-transferability of class E III and IV employees-Not a relevant consideration for applying the State ratio for reservation to these employees. Promotion-Reservation for SC and ST-Percentage of-Tests to deter- mine-Held: should be detennined by taking a general view and not what was due lo SC and ST separately or segment-wis<>---flence, 15% and 7-112% F quota for SC and ST respectively compared to 7% and 9% did not amount lo injustice to ST. The percentage of resen-ation for initial recruitment in the Port Trust as fixed by the State Government was 7% for Scheduled Castes and G 9% for Scheduled Tribes. However, the Port Trust fixed the percentage of resen-ation for promotional posts as 15% for Scheduled Castes and 7-1/2% for Scheduled Tribes which was the same as the All-India percentage. The respondent filed a petition in the High Court challenging the aforesaid resen-ation policy. The High Court allowed the petition holding H 553 554 SUPREME COURT REPORTS f1996J SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A that it was not open to the Port Trust to depart from the percentage of reservation applicable at the tin1e of initial a11puintn1ent while considering the reservation ratio in the pro1notional posts. Being aggrieved, the appel- lants preferred the present appeal. B Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1. The High Court erred in holding that the percentage of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes applicable at the time of initial appointment also applied lo promotional posts. So far as direct recruitment in Class Ill and Class IV posts is concerned, the policy C of the Central Government itself, as mentioned in Para 2.1 (ii) of Chapter 2 of the brochure on •Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Services', is that the percentage shall be as shown in Appendix 3, which generally would be in portion to the population of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in the respective States(ferritories. But qua the posts to be lilied by promotion, what has been stated in sub-para D (iii) is that the percentage shall be 15 for Scheduled Castes and 7-1/2 for Scheduled Tribes. This clearly shows that what is required to be kept in mind at the time of initial recruitment is not required to be adopted for promotion. [557-E-G) E Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, [1992] Supp. 3 SCC 217, referred to. 2.1. Orders issued by the Central Government regarding the reser- vation to posts under it in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are to apply, with appropriate changes, to all appointments to be F made by the Port Trust. However, the High Court erred in holding that the Bombay Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promo- tion) Regulations, 1977 applied to recruitment to Class lil and IV posts. Para 2 of the suh-rrgulations styled as l'vlen1orandun1 explanatory of the Rrgulations, has spcl'ifically stated that the regulaliuns apply to all posts, G except those covered hy Section 24 (I) (a) ol' the Major Port Trust Act, 1963 i.e., the posts of Heads of Departments and posts the maximum of the pay scale of which exceeds Rs. 2,000. [557-B-D) 2.2. The High Court has given another reason to accept the State ratio-the same is non-transferability of Class Ill and Class IV employees, H because of which their's was taken as "a local cadre". This is not a relevant I • ' SWATI v. D.K. KARANDIKAR [HANSARIA,J.] 555 consideration \\'llile deciding about the contours of reservation policy. A Further, it seems th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.