UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus S. VINODH KUMAR AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 10 S.C.R. 41 · Decided: 18-09-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

I 
- -~ 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
S. VINODH KUMAR AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 18, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND H.S. BEDI, JJ.] 
.) 
Service Law-Recruitment-Different cut-off-marks provided 
for different categories of candidates-Non-filling of few reserved 
posts due to non-availability of qualified candidates-Unsuccessful c 
candidates seeking appointment against reserved post by lowering cut-
off marks-Denied by Central Administrative Tribunal-Allowed by 
High Court-On appeal, held : The candidates of general category 
can.wt be appointed against reserved posts-The Authority was 
having requisite jurisdiction to fix cut-off marks-Jn the facts, it D 
--\ 
cannot be said that fixing of cut-off was arbitrary so as to offend 
Article I 4 of the Constitution-It was for the Authority to decide as 
to whether the post was to be dereserved or carried forward-The 
candidates, having taken part in the selection process, knowing the 
procedure thereof, estoppedfrom challenging the same-Constitution E 
of India, 1950-Article 14-Estoppel. 
Vacancies were advertised for recruitment to the post of 
r 
'Gangman' by Railways. The Authority had reserved the right to 
increase or decrease the number of posts. Certain seats were also 
F 
reserved for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, 
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Cut-off marks were 
provided for different categories of candidates. Out of the total 
vacancies, the post belonging to General and Other Backward Class 
Category were filled. However, some posts belonging to Scheduled 
G 
J-
Caste and Scheduled Tribe category could not be filled up due to 
non-availability of qualified eligible candidates. 
Some unsuccessful candidates from General Category 
(respondents), filed application before Central Administrative 
41 
H 
42 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 10 S.C.R. 
A Tribunal. The same was disposed of, directing the Administration 
to consider the question oflowering of cut-off marks of the general 
y 
candidates. The Competent Authority decided that lowering of cut-
off-marks would not be conducive to general merit of the candidates. 
Thereafter another application was filed and the same was dismissed 
B by the Central Administrative Tribunal. In Writ Petition, High Court 
directed the concerned Authority to appoint the general category 
candidates by lowering the cut-off marks against the reserv~d posts. 
Hence the present appeal. 
A._ 
c 
Appellant contended that the direction of the High Court was 
illegal, as the reserved vacancies could not be filled up by general 
candidates. 
Respondents contended that specification of cut-off-marks for 
general candidates was arbitrary; and the order of High Court could 
D not be said to be illegal because previously Railway Board, itself 
had directed to fill up the unfilled reserved vacancies by general 
candidates in terms of Circular dated 12.3.1976. 
>--
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
E 
HELD: 1. Only because the cut-off marks of general category 
candidates had been fixed on the basis of certain criteria, the same 
by itself, would not mean that no cut-off mark had been fixed. The 
fact that the Railway Administration intended to fix the cut-off mark 
for the purpose of filling up the vacancies in respect of the general 
-f 
F category as also reserved category candidates is evident from the 
fact that different cut-off marks were fixed for different categories 
of candidates. Therefore, it cannot be said that the cut-off marks 
fixed was wholly arbitrary so as to offend the principles of equality 
enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution oflndia. The power 
G of the employer to fix the cut-off marks is neither denied nor 
disputed. If the cut-off mark was fixed on a rational basis, no 
.~ 
exception thereto can be taken. [Para 10] [48-H; 49-A-C] 
2. Respondents herein had approached the Tribunal in the year 
2000. The Tribunal directed the appellants to consider this case of 
H lowering of the cut-off marks. An inference, therefore, can be drawn 
) 
U.0.1. v. S. VINODHKUMAR 
43 
from the aforementioned fact that the main prayer of the A 
respondents was that the cut-off marks should be lowered. 
Appellants admittedly did not agree to the said proposal. The 
action of the appellants impugned before the Tribunal must, 
therefore, be considered from the view point as to whether it had 
the requisite jurisdiction to do so. The Tribunal upheld the B 
contention of the appellant. Once it is held that the appella

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