Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from an appeal by special leave against an order of the Madras State Administrative Tribunal in a service law dispute concerning reservation in promotions. The appellants, employees, challenged an Office Memorandum dated 21 January 1977 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, which provided that where promotions were made on seniority subject to fitness and a qualifying examination was held, suitable relaxation in qualifying standard for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes should be made. The Tribunal held that the saving of existing reservations in promotion for five years under Para 829 of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India included such provision for lesser qualifying marks. The appellants contended that this was contrary to the majority judgment in Indra Sawhney, which expressly held that in matters of promotion, prescribing lower qualifying marks or a lesser level of evaluation for reserved categories was not permissible as it compromised efficiency of administration under Article 335. The respondents argued that the provision was a concession/relaxation saved by Para 829. The Supreme Court examined the relevant paragraphs of Indra Sawhney, particularly Paras 829, 831, 549 and 713. It noted that Para 831 allowed concessions and relaxations such as temporary exemption from passing tests for a limited period (as in State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas) and carrying forward of vacancies and in-service coaching/training (as in Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh v. Union of India), but expressly prohibited lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation for promotion. The Court held that the saving under Para 829 only protected reservations already made in promotion, and could not extend to a provision that was itself impermissible. The Tribunal's reliance on the term 'status quo' was erroneous because the Supreme Court's declaration did not save unconstitutional or impermissible relaxations. The Court clarified that in direct recruitment, reasonably lesser qualifying marks could be prescribed for OBCs, SCs and STs consistent with efficiency, but the same was not permissible in promotions. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, and declared that the provision for lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation in promotion was not permissible under Article 16(4) read with Article 335. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Reservation in Promotion - Lower Qualifying Marks - Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 16(4), 335 - The Madras State Administrative Tribunal held that the saving of reservations in promotion under Para 829 of Indra Sawhney included provisions for lesser qualifying marks in qualifying examination for promotion; Supreme Court reversed, holding that such provision is not permissible in promotion because it compromises efficiency of administration contrary to Article 335. Held that direct recruitment alone may have reasonably lesser qualifying marks; in promotion only concessions like temporary exemption from tests and carrying forward vacancies/in-service coaching are permissible. (Paras 829-831) B) Constitutional Law - Reservation in Promotion - Concessions Distinguished - Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 16(4), 335 - The Court distinguished permissible concessions such as temporary exemption from passing tests for two years (State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas) and carrying forward of vacancies and in-service coaching/training (Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh v. Union of India) from impermissible lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation. Held that Para 829 saving only covers existing reservations, not such impermissible provisions; order of Tribunal set aside and appeal allowed. (Paras 831, 549, 713)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the saving of reservations in promotion under Para 829 of Indra Sawhney includes provisions for lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in qualifying examinations for promotion, and whether such provision is permissible under Article 16(4) read with Article 335 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed; order of Madras State Administrative Tribunal set aside; clarified that provision for lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation in the matter of promotion is not permissible under Article 16(4) in view of Article 335; Para 829 saving of existing reservations does not apply to such provision. No costs.
Law Points
- Reservation in promotions under Article 16(4) does not include lower qualifying marks or lesser level of evaluation
- Article 335 prohibits lower qualifying marks in promotion
- Concessions like temporary exemption from tests for two years (N.M. Thomas) and carrying forward vacancies/in-service coaching (Karamchari Sangh) are permissible
- Direct recruitment may have reasonably lesser qualifying marks for OBC/SC/ST consistent with efficiency
- Para 829 saving of existing reservations for five years does not save impermissible lower qualifying marks for promotion
