Case Note & Summary
The case arose as a sequel to T. Devadasan v. Union of India, concerning reservations in Central Secretariat Service promotions. The petitioner, B.N. Tiwari, was an Assistant in Grade IV of the Central Secretariat Service. The next promotional post was Section Officer (Assistant Superintendent). Recruitment to the post of Section Officer was made through three methods: 50% by direct recruitment from those who obtained lower ranks in Indian Administrative Service etc. examinations, 25% by promotion from Grade IV on the basis of a departmental examination held at intervals by the Union Public Service Commission, and 25% by promotion from Grade IV on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness. In February 1960, the Union Public Service Commission issued a notification for a limited competitive examination for promotion to the post of Section Officers. The notification stated that reservation of 12.5% of available vacancies would be made for members of Scheduled Castes and 5% for members of Scheduled Tribes. The number of vacancies to be filled was to be announced later. The petitioner appeared in this examination and secured the 37th rank. A press communique said that the number of vacancies expected to be filled was 48, out of which 32 were reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and 16 were unreserved. Eventually the Union Public Service Commission recommended 45 names: 16 unreserved and 29 reserved. Finally, the Government made only 43 appointments: 15 in the unreserved quota and 28 in the reserved quota. This heavy reservation was made on the basis of the carry forward rule put into force from 1955. The original resolution of the Ministry of Home Affairs dated September 13, 1950 fixed reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes at 12.5% and 5% respectively without any carry forward rule. In 1952, supplementary instructions introduced a carry forward rule for one year only. In 1955, the Government substituted those instructions with a new carry forward rule that carried forward unfilled reserved vacancies for two years and did not provide for lapse. In T. Devadasan v. Union of India, this Court struck down the 1955 carry forward rule as unconstitutional. The petitioner then filed a writ petition under Article 32, contending that after Devadasan no carry forward rule existed, and only the original 17.5% reservation should apply; with his 37th rank he should be appointed. Alternatively, he argued that if the 1952 rule was deemed to exist, it was also unconstitutional under Article 16. The respondents opposed the petition, arguing that even if the 1952 carry forward rule was non-existent, the petitioner would not be entitled to appointment due to his rank. The Supreme Court held that the 1952 rule ceased to exist when substituted by the 1955 rule. The 1955 rule was declared invalid in Devadasan; that did not revive the 1952 rule. Thus, no carry forward rule existed in 1960. However, the Court clarified that Devadasan was only concerned with the carry forward rule; it did not touch the original reservation of 12.5% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for Scheduled Tribes under the 1950 resolution. That reservation had to be given effect to. Applying the original reservation, only 34 unreserved vacancies were left to be filled. The petitioner's rank of 37 was lower, so he was not entitled to appointment. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Reservation in Public Employment - Carry Forward Rule - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 16 - The 1955 carry forward rule, which carried forward unfilled reserved vacancies for two years, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in T. Devadasan v. Union of India; the 1952 carry forward rule had already been substituted and ceased to exist. The Court held that there was no carry forward rule in existence in 1960 when the petitioner appeared in the limited competitive examination, and the invalidation of the 1955 rule did not revive the 1952 rule. (Paras 10-12) B) Constitutional Law - Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes - Scope of Devadasan Judgment - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 16(4) - The judgment in Devadasan only struck down the carry forward rule as modified in 1955; it did not affect the original reservation of 12.5% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for Scheduled Tribes fixed by the Ministry of Home Affairs resolution dated September 13, 1950. The Court held that this original reservation had to be given effect to, leaving only 34 unreserved vacancies out of the 48 expected vacancies; the petitioner's rank of 37 was lower than the number of unreserved vacancies, so he was not entitled to appointment. (Paras 12-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the carry forward rule of 1952 still existed after substitution by the 1955 rule and after the 1955 rule was declared invalid; whether the 1952 rule if existing was unconstitutional; whether the petitioner was entitled to appointment on the basis of only 12.5% and 5% reservation without any carry forward
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition. It held that the 1952 carry forward rule ceased to exist when substituted by the 1955 rule, and the 1955 rule was declared unconstitutional in T. Devadasan v. Union of India, so no carry forward rule existed in 1960. However, the original reservation of 12.5% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for Scheduled Tribes under the 1950 resolution remained valid and had to be given effect to. After allowing for these reservations, only 34 unreserved vacancies were left to be filled; the petitioner's rank of 37 was lower, so he was not entitled to appointment.
Law Points
- When a rule is substituted by a subsequent rule
- the earlier rule ceases to exist
- a declaration that the subsequent rule is unconstitutional does not revive the earlier rule
- the original reservation of 12.5% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for Scheduled Tribes under the 1950 resolution remains valid
- the carry forward rule modified in 1955 is unconstitutional
- judicial declaration in Devadasan limited to carry forward rule only
