LexSUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUBLIC HEALTH, U.T CHANDIGARH AND ORS. versus KULDEEP SINGH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUBLIC HEALTH, U.T.
CHANDIGARH AND ORS.
v.
KULDEEP SINGH AND ORS.
B
JANUARY 21, 1997
[K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND
G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.]
c
Constitution of India, 1950: An'.icles 14, 16(1), 16(1A), 38, 46 and 335.
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes-Reservation in promo-
tion-Principle of alternative exchange-Non-availability of scheduled tribe
candidate-Duty to consider scheduled caste candidate-Carry f01ward
rule-Respondents a scheduled caste candidate-Promotion as Head
D Draftsman-Respondent not considered-Other candidates appointed-Right
to promotion according to roster denied to respondent-Cliallenge by respon-
dent-Direction by T1ibunal to consider respondent from the date he was
actually due for promotion with consequential benefits-Appeal before
Supreme Court--Held the duty to implement the rule of reservation is a
E
constitutional duty-{t has to be performed in its true contents and
spirit-Maintenance of the roster and strict adherence to it in accordance with
the brochure issued by the Government of India in that behalf to implement
the rule of reservatio11 in promotion is the charge and trust put on public
servants-The petitioner herein, has betrayed that trust and tended to frustrate
the public policy-Petitioner failed to peifonn that constitutional duty-The
F Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh disputed to look into and
take appropriate action against the concerned ening officers-Tribunal 1ightly
held 01e vacancy ought to have been filled up by promoting the respondent
when other candidate was considered and vacancy reserved for Scheduled
Tribes was filled up without considen'ng the case of the responde11t-Omission
G
thereof amounted to violation of constitutional duty and avoidance of im-
plementation of the rule of reservation and the roster provided by the Govern-
ment-The view of the Tribunal, therefore, is correct in law warranting 110
inteif erence.
Comptroller and Auditor-General of India Gian Prakash, New Delhi
H and Anr. v. KS. laga1111atha11 & Anr., [1986] 2 SCC 679, referred to.
454
-r
~
;.... ... ·-
-"t>
0
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH v. KULDEEP SINGH
455
--+
State of Kera/a v. N.M. Thomas, [1976] 2 SCC 310; State of Punjab A
v. Hiralal, [1971] 3 SCR 267 and Akhil Bhartiya Soshit Karamchami Sangh
v. Union of India, [1981] 1 SCC 246, cited.
Public Administration-Public se1vant-P1inciple OJ power coupled
with duty-Eve;y public se1vant is t1Ustee of the society-He should be f aithfttl
in implementation of the political, social, economic and constitutional
policies to integrate the nation, to achieve excellence and efficiency in the
public administration-A public se1va11t entrusted with duty and power to
implement constitutional policy under Articles 16(4), 16(4-A), 15(4), 335 and
all inter-related Directive Principles should exhibit transperacy in implemen-
tation and should go accountable for due effectuation of constitutional goals.
Commissioner of Police, Bombay v. Gordhandqs Bhanji, [1952] SCR
135 and Julius v. Lord Bishop of Oxford, 5 App. Cas. 214; referred to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C)
B
c
No. 492 of 1997.
D
From the Judgment and Order dated 6.9.96 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Chandigarh in 0.A. No. 330 of 1989.
K.B. Rohtagi and Ms. Aparna Rohtagi for the Petitioners.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
This special leave petition arises from the order of the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, made on 6.9.1996 in O.A. No.
330/CH/89. Admittedly, the respondent belongs to -Scheduled Castes and
E
was eligible for promotion as Head- Draftsman. For the promotion to the F
said post, the petitioners appointed Mr. Ravinder Kumar Sood on March
30, 1988 and Mr. Dharam Nand on March 14, 1989. The respondent had
challenged their promotion and non-consideration of his case claiming that
he was eligible to be considered in the post as a reserved candidate though
the post was meant for Scheduled Tribes. By order of the Government of
India, the posts are inter-changeable between Scheduled Castes and the G
Scheduled Tribes and if the candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribes is not
available,· the eligible candidate belonging to . Scheduled Castes is entitled
to be considered for promotion to the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe
Candidates; Since he was not considered, the legitimate right to promotion
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.