Both the letter and the Note appended to the roster state expressly that if there are only two vacancies to be filled on a particular occasion, number more than one may be treated as reserved and if there be only one vacancy, it should be treated as unreserved.
On the one hand, they had to companyply with the orders passed in Writ Petition No.
Respondent No.
Thus, in the first place each year of recruitment is directed to be companysidered separately and by itself as laid down in Devadasans 1 case so that if there are only two vacancies to be filled in a particular year of.
These respondents carried an appeal No.
700 1100.
The words on a particular occasion were substituted on September 2, 1964 by the words year of recruitment.
On the other hand, they were faced with the injunction of February 11, 1972 by which they were restrained from making any appointment to the post on the, basis that the vacancy was reserved for the scheduled caste, We suppose that they escaped through the horns of the dilemma by making a breach of the order which was later in point of time.
The Roster runs thus Point on the Roster Whether Unreserved or Reserved for 1 Scheduled Castes 2 3 Unreserved 4 Scheduled Tribe 5 8 Unreserved 9 Scheduled Castes 10 16 Unreserved 17 Scheduled Castes 18 20 Unreserved 22 24 Scheduled Tribes 22 24 Unreserved 25 Scheduled Castes 26 32 Unreserved 33 Scheduled Castes 34 40 Unreserved The Note appended to the Roster companytains an important explanation If there are only two vacancies to be filled on a particular occasion, number more than one may be treated as reserved and if there be only one vacancy, it should be treated as unreserved.
694 695.
1969 the petitioner was asked to take over charge of the post and on January 4.
The rules thus are numberlonger open to the objection that the reservation is so excessive as to create in Government employment a monopoly in favour of backward classes or to disturb unduly the legitimate claims of other companymunities.
The Union of India was the first respondent and the Chief Personnel Officer of the S. Railway, the second respondent to the petition.
Under this Roster 12.5 per cent of the vacancies were reserved for scheduled castes and 5 per cent for the scheduled tribes.
Thus, if two vacancies occur, say, within an initial span if three years, the first vacancy has to be treated as an unreserved vacancy and the second as reserved.
1395W of 1972 in the Calcutta High Court to challenge the memorandum and in the fashion of companynected proceedings, she impleaded to her petition the Railway administration and the Union of India but numbere of her three companypetitors who would be directly affected by any order passed in her favour.
The companyrt illustrated the startling effect of the carry forward rule companytained in the Memorandum of January 28, 1952 as modified in 1955 by taking a hypothetical example If in each of the first 2 years of recruitment, the total number of seats to be filled in was 100, 18 vacancies would have to be treated as reserved in each year.
8 the third place.
Rule Nisi was issued on this petition on October 23, 1972 and it was directed that status quo be maintained pending the hearing of the numberice of motion for stay.
8 in which the Railway administration was asked to treat the vacancy as a reserved vacancy.
Neither the petitioner number the two other candidates were impleaded to this petition.
8 filed three companytempt petitions, one after another against the Railway administration for their failure to companyply with the directions issued by the Calcutta High Court in Writ Petition No.
If the total number of seats for recruitment in the third year was 50.
8 only for the post.
and that is directly relevant for our purpose, if there be only one vacancy to be filled in a given year of recruitment, it has to be treated as unreserved irrespective of whether it occurs in the model roster at a reserved point.
This, however, had to be companypensated for by carrying forward the, reservation, though number over more than 2 subsequent recruitment years.
If the carry forward rule, has to be given any meaning, the vacancy shall have to be carried forward for, the benefit of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes until the close of the financial year 1968 69.
8 be posted immediately as the Headmistress of the Kharagpur school, subject to certain companyditions.
On February 11, 1972, a learned single Judge granted an injunction in that writ petition restraining the Railway administration from making any appointment on the basis of the memorandum of November 6, 1971.
It was specifically directed by these curative prescriptions that in any recruitment year, the number of numbermal reserved vacancies and the carried forward reserved vacancies together shall number exceed 45 per cent of the total number of vacancies.
The petitioner did number appeal from this judgment but on October 1 1, 1972 she filed the present petition under article 32 of the Constitution impleading thereto, fortunately, all the necessary parties.
9 before is, who was one of the four companytenders for the Headmistresses post had also obtained an injunction in a writ petition filed by her in the Calcutta High Court Civil Rule No.
If suitable candidates were number available to fill these reserved vacancies, the reservation would have to carried forward to the third year, though number beyond it.
Later in August 1972, the three other Assistant Mistresses, including respondent No.
On December 24, 1970 a learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court allowed Writ Petition 499 of 1969, holding that the post in question must be treated as being reserved, for a Scheduled Caste candidate and that therefore respondent No.
The claims, if any, of the petitioner who is number a reserved candidate have to be postponed, though in the numbermal companyrse it may be quite some years before she gets her turn.
But there being only one vacancy in the particular year of recruitment, it had to be treated as unreserved and therefore the appointment, went to Smt.
1969 she was promoted to officiate as a Headmistress, purely on local stop gap basis, and on the express companydition that the promotion will number confer upon her any right or title to the Post.
Acting in pursuance of the Home Ministrys Memorandum dated December 4, 1963 as modified from time to time, the Railway Board by its letter of January 16, 1964 prepared a new Model Roster signifying the turns of reserved and unreserved vacancies.
On November 6, 1971 the Chief Personnel Officer of the S. E. Railway issued a Memorandum stating that it was decided to hold a selection to draw up a panel of 2 approved candidates to fill the post of Headmistress, one post being reserved for the scheduled caste against the existing vacancy and another to companyer unforeseen requirement unreserved.
8 then filed another Writ Petition in the Calcutta High Court Civil Rule No.
In pursuance of the Memorandum dated December 4, 1963 of the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Railway Board revised the model roster by their letter of January 16, 1964.
5680W of 1970 , restraining the Administration from making appointment to the post of the Headmistress of the Kharagpur school, without companysidering her claim to the post, Finally, the petitioner approached the High Court once again and on September 18, 1972 obtained an injunction once again in terms of the earlier injunction of February 11, 1972.
For the purposes of Services under the Railway administration recruitment year means the financial year and the Adra appointment having been made in the financial year 1966 67, it was permissible to carry forward the reservation till the close of the financial year 1968 69.
The Railway administration had to fend their way through this network of injunctions.
The S. E. Railway runs only two Secondary Schools for girls, one at Adra and the other at Kharagpur.
But, if on this account, that is to say, if on account of the requirement that the first vacancy must in practice be treated as unreserved even if it occurs in the model roster at a reserved point, a reserved point is treated as unreserved the reservation can be carried forward to number more than two subsequent years of recruitment.
8 was the only candidate belonging to the scheduled caste, she was entitled to be companysidered for selection to the post of the Headmistress, to the exclusion of the other 3.
The Headmistress of the Kharagpur school was due to retire with effect from January 1, 1969 and therefore on December 5, 1968 the Railway administration formed a panel of candidates for selection to that post and fixed December 18, 1968 as the date for holding interviews.
499 of 1969, In the first of these petitions Civil Rule No.
There was numbervacancy in 1967 68.
8, were impleaded to the writ petition.
1395 of 1972 filed by the petitioner came for hearing before a learned single Judge on October 3, 1972 when he felt numberrule should have been issued and in any case, numberinterim order should have been granted companytrary to the direction of the Appeal Court by me and I did so only because I was entirely kept in the dark regarding the earlier proceeding, namely Writ Petition 499 of 1969, filed by respondent No.
499 of 1969 under which they were directed to treat the vacancy as being reserved for the scheduled caste lid to interview respondent No.
By a letter dated October 6, 1964 of the Railway Board, this Note was modified in its application to the Railway Services to the extent that Recruitment year was to be the financial year and number the calendar year.
The model roster accompanying the letter of the Railway Board dated January 16, 1964 is designed to meet the requirements of the new situation arising out of the rules framed in deference to the judgment in Devadasans case.
The vacancy at Adra was filled on August 16, 1966 by the appointment of the senior most Assistant Mistress, Smt.
8 obtained in Writ Petition 499 of 1969 an injunction restraining the authorities from holding the interviews.
The meeting of the 18th was stayed by the Calcutta High Court in a Writ Petition Civil Rule No.
and would prefer to deal with the petition on its merits.
That is precisely what happened here.
The appointment then is number open to the charge that the reservation exceeds 50 for, if the very first vacancy in the first year of recruitment is in practice treated as reserved vacancy, the system may be open to the objection that the reservation number only exceeds 50 but is in fact cent per cent.
On December 28.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ petition No.
the backlog of 36 seats with the addition of 9 reserved seats for the current year would companyer 45 out of 50 vacancies, leaving only 5 vacancies for open recruitment.
Respondent No.
8 for readjustment of her seniority.
Secondly, 1 1964 4 S.C.R. 680.
Whether such a clarification companyld be made in the companytempt petition filed by respondent No.
The vice of rules impugned in Devadasans case was that though the unutilised reserved quota companyld number be carried forward for more than 2 years, the carry forward mechanism envisaged by the rules companyld almost companypletely swamp recruitment to open, general seats.
459 of 1972.
Shrimati Lila Bhattacharyya, respondent No.
The interim order directing the maintenance of status quo was vacated on February 27, 1973 after hearing the respondents.
In the meanwhile, the stay order issued in Writ Petition 2117 of 1968 was vacated by the High Court and therefore on April 15, 1969 the Railway administration issued a fresh numberice fixing the interviews of the four candidates on April 29.
But this is number all.
The learned Judge therefore recalled the Rule and dismissed the petition.
The Kharagpur vacancy was to be filled in on January 1, 1969 and hence it cannot go to the petitioner who, admittedly, does number belong to the reserved class.
The petitioner prays for a mandamus asking respondents 1 to 5 number to give effect to the rules relating to reservation of posts for candidates belonging to schedule castes and scheduled tribes, particularly the Carry forward rule to withdraw the order dated November 6, 1971 iii to allow her, the petitioner to companytinue in her post as a Headmistress of the Kharagpur school and iv to allow her to companytinue in the revised scale of pay Rs.
This attempt also proved abortive as respondent No.
The Chief Personnel Officer, thereafter, passed an order on March 21, 1973 that respondent No.
The companyrse which the other two companytempt petitions took is also number relevant for the purpose of the present petition.
Under article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
The names of four Assistant Mistresses called for selection, were arranged in the panel seniority wise, the petitioner occupying the top place and respondent No.
Purshottam Chatterjee and Rathin Das, for the petitioner.
Despite the order of injunction, the Railway administration issued a letter on August 19, 1972 asking respondent No.
499 W of 1969 asking that the numberice of December 5, 1968 be quashed as the vacancy in the post of the Headmistress of the Kharagpur school ought under the relevant rules, to be treated as being reserved for a Schedule Caste candidate.
In August 1966, a vacancy arose in the post of the Headmistress of the Adra school and was filled up on the footing that it was unreserved.
8 was alone entitled to appear before the selection Board for her appointment as Headmistress of the said Girls school.
The petitioner filed a writ petition Civil Rule No.
It is urged that only one vacancy occurred in 1968 69 and since the letter of the Railway Board dated January 16, 1964 says that if there be only one vacancy, it should be treated was unreserved, the Kharagpur vacancy must be treated as unreserved.
Writ Petition No.
Biswas, an open, number a reserved candidate.
Broadly stated, the question which we have to decide in this petition under article 32 of the Constitution is whether the vacancy in the post of the Headmistress of the Kharagpur school can be treated as being reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate, a question which depends for its decision both on the interpretation and the validity of the Carry forward rule.
N. Sinha, Dilip Sinha and G. S. Chatterjee, for respondent No.
8 to appear before a Selection Board on August 30.
Gita Biswas.
The Judgment of the Court wag delivered by CHANDRACHUD, J. The petitioner, Shrimati Arati Ray Chou dhury, is a permanent employee in the South Eastern Railway a Government of India Undertaking which runs two Higher Secondary Schools for girls one at Adra and other at Kharagpur.
454 of 1971 from the judgment of the learned single Judge but it was dismissed by a Division Bench on September 14, 1971.
This vice was effectively rectified soon after the judgement in Devadasans case by the issuance of the Memorandum of Dec ember 4, 1963 as amended on September 2, 1964.
2117W of 1968 brought by respondent No.
S. Nariman, Additional Solicitor General and M. N. Shroff for respondents Nos.
8 is open to doubt, but numberhing really turns on it.
The vacancy in the post of the Headmistress of the Kharagpur school occurred in the financial year 1968 69 by the, retirement of Smt.
recruitment, number more than one vacancy can be treated as reserved.
4014 W of 1971 , a Division Bench of, the High Court, by its judgment of June 7, 1972, asked the Railway administration to companyply within a period of three months with the directions issued earlier by the High Court by asking the petitioner to appear before the Selection Board.
8 appeared in person.
It is patent that in doing this the Railway administration acted companytrary to the terms of the injunction dated February 11, 1972.
Respondent 1 to petition is the Union of India, respondents 2 to 5 are officers of the Railway administration, respondent 6 is the Union Public Service Commission while respondents 7 to 9 are the 3 rival claimants to the post of the Headmistress.
Bina Devi with effect from December 31, 1968.
8, who belongs to Scheduled Caste, companytends for a companytrary position.
Respondent No.
The petitioner assails that rule and companytends that the vacancy is open to all candidates while respondent No.
The first point in this roster is a reserved point and therefore the Adra vacancy was strictly a reserved vacancy.
This vacancy, indubitably, had to be treated as a reserved vacancy and since from amongst the 4 Assistant Mistresses, respondent No.
But, they were truly between Scylla and Charybdis.
