http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 22  

PETITIONER: N.K. CHAUHAN & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT01/11/1976

BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. BHAGWATI, P.N. FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

CITATION:  1977 AIR  251            1977 SCR  (1)1037  1977 SCC  (1) 308  CITATOR INFO :  RF         1980 SC1275  (24)  R          1980 SC2056  (73)  RF         1981 SC  41  (29,31)  AP         1981 SC 357  (5)  E          1981 SC 561  (70,72)  R          1982 SC1244  (10,14)  R          1983 SC 769  (22)  R          1984 SC1291  (19,31)  RF         1985 SC 774  (20)  R          1985 SC 781  (13)  R          1985 SC1019  (27)  D          1985 SC1681  (5)  RF         1986 SC 638  (15)  RF         1986 SC1455  (10,11,12,16,17,18,19,20)  E&D        1987 SC 424  (11,13,24)  RF         1987 SC1676  (11)  RF         1987 SC2359  (18)  D          1988 SC 268  (26)  RF         1988 SC 654  (10,13)  R          1989 SC 278  (21)  R          1990 SC1007  (20)  NF         1991 SC 284  (1,24)

ACT:             Constitution  of  India--Articles   14-16--Civil   Serv-         ice--Seniority--Direct Recruits and promotees--Quota--Wheth-         er roster implicit--Benefit of Service-Words &  Phrases--"As         far as practicable".

HEADNOTE:            The appellants are the promotee Deputy Collectors in  the         State of Gujarat. The contesting respondents are the  direct         recruits to the parent cadre of Deputy Collectors.  7 Deputy         Collectors  who  are the contesting  respondents   in   this         appeal and who were directly recruited as Deputy  Collectors         in  and  after  1963 claimed that they were  senior  to  the         appellants  who were the promotees  promoted as Deputy  Col-         lectors  between  the years 1960 and 1963 by filing  a  Writ         Petition in the High Court.  The routine source of  recruit-         ment to the posts of Deputy Collectors used to be Mamlatdars         who  were  promoted as Deputy Collectors.  In  1939,  direct

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 22  

       recruitment  policy was also evolved for this post.   By  an         order  of  1941 the mode of  determining  seniority  between         direct recruits   and promotees was settled.  As far as  the         direct recruits were  concerned,  their seniority was to run         from  the date of their appointment on probation and in  the         case of promotees such service was to begin with   promotion         in  substantive vacancy if continued without break.   During         the year 1950 to 1959 the direct recruitment was  discontin-         ued.   By the Bombay Government Resolution dated  30-7-1959,         the  mode  of direct recruitment was again started  and  the         proportion  in which the recruitment from the  two  sources,         namely, the direct recruits and the promotees, was fixed  as         50: 50 as far as practicable.             On  1-5-1960,  the  Bombay  State  was  bifurcated  into         Gujarat   and   Maharashtra.  On 1-5-1960,  a  circular  was         issued by the Gujarat Government adopting the rules, resolu-         tions, notifications etc. of the Bombay State.  By a further         clarificatory resolution dated 27-5-1960 Gujarat  Government         provided  that nothing contained in the circular dated  1-5-         1960 shall apply to appointments of officers, authorities or         persons  which  may be made by the Government on   or  after         1-5-1960.   During the year 1959-62,.no  direct  recruitment         was made but many promotions were effected.  The Writ  Peti-         tion filed by the direct recruits was dismissed by a learned         Single  judge of the High Court.  The Division Bench of  the         High  Court, however, accepted  the  appeal  of   the   con-         testing respondents.         In an appeal by Special Leave the appellants contended:                       1.  The expression ’as far as practicable’  in                       the  resolution of  1959 provides  a  sensible                       safety valve.  Therefore, the rule is  neither                       exception-proof  nor abstractly  absolute  but                       realistic and flexibly true to life.                       2. The mandate of equality in Articles 14  and                       16 does not require pushing down the promotees                       in  the  seniority list in the fact  of  their                       actual service and legal appointment.                       3.  Rotation is not implicit in quota.   Quota                       without   rotation   is  also  reasonable  and                       constitutional as much as quota with rotation.                       The  choice, both being permissible and  fair,                       is left to the Administration.                       4. The contesting respondents contended                       (i) The rule of law is the enemy of  arbitrary                       absolutism and the discretion to disobey is  a                       doctrine  of  despotism  and  cannot  be  sub-                       scribed to by a Court.                       1038                       (ii)  ’As far as practicable does  not  permit                       the  State  to  deviate from  it.   It  merely                       authorises  provisional variations  or  ad-hoc                       solutions  or emergency arrangements  to  meet                       the  difficulty of the Administration  without                       making  formal or regular appointments to  the                       posts in question.                       (iii) Rotational system is implicit in quota.                       (iv)-Any  deviation from rotational system  is                       violative  of Articles  14 and 16 of the  Con-                       stitution.                       Allowing the appeal held:                        1. The State in tune with the mandate of  the                       quota   rule   must  make serious  efforts  to                       secure  hands  to  fill half  the  number   of                       vacancies  from the open market.  If  it  does                       not  succeed   despite   honest   and  serious

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 22  

                     effort,  it qualifies for departure  from  the                       rule.  If it has become non-feasible,  imprac-                       ticable to get the requisite quota  of  direct                       recruits having done all that it could, it was                       free to fill the  Post  by promotion of  suit-                       able  hands, if the filling up of the   vacan-                       cies  was administratively necessary and could                       not wait.  The  sense  of  the rule is that as                       far as possible the quota system must be  kept                       up  and if not practicable promotees in  place                       of direct recruits or direct recruits in place                       of  promotees  may be  inducted  applying  the                       regular procedures without suffering the seats                       to lie indefinitely vacant.                                                  [1050 F-H, 1051 A]                       2.  The Government sent a requisition  for  12                       posts  of  Deputy Collectors  to  the  Gujarat                       Public  Service  Commission  as  early  as  in                       October, 1960. On account of commission having                       raised  various  queries  including   require-                       ments  of adequate knowledge of  Marathi   and                       Gujarati,    the examination could not be held                       during  the  years  1960-1962.     The  expla-                       nation given by the Government is prima  facie                       good  and     not  rebutted as got up.   Since                       the  Government  took active  steps   in   the                       direction of direct  recruitment, the   excep-                       tion to the  Government Resolution comes  into                       operation.  The Government in the present case                       did all that it could. [1051 A-F]                       3. Quota is not inter-locked with Rota.  [1052                       A]                       (a) The quota system does not necessitate  the                       adoption of the  rotational rule in  practical                       application.    Many  ways  of  working    out                       ’quota’  prescription can be devised of  which                       rota is certainly one.                       (b) While laying down a quota when filling  up                       vacancies  in  a   cadre from  more  than  one                       source,  it is open to Government. subject  to                       tests  under  Art. 16, to choose ’a  year’  or                       other   period   of  the  vacancy  by  vacancy                       basis to work out the quota among the sources.                       But once the Court is satisfied, examining for                       constitutionality  the method  proposed,  that                       there   is  no   invalidity,    administrative                       technology may have free play in choosing  one                       or other  of  the familiar processes of imple-                       menting the quota rule.  We, as Judges, cannot                       strike  down the particular scheme because  it                       is unpalatable to forensic taste.                       (c) Seniority, normally, is measured by length                       of continuous. officiating service--the actual                       is  easily accepted as the legal.   This  does                       not preclude a different prescription, consti-                       tutionality tests  being satisfied.                       (d)   Promotees  regularly  appointed   during                       period  1960-62 in excess of their quota,  for                       want of direct recruits can claim their  whole                       length of service for seniority.                       (e) Promotees appointed in 1963 and onwards in                       excess  of their quota should be  pushed  down                       and  absorbed  in  vacancies  in  their  quota                       during subsequent years. [1057 E-H, 1058 A-C]         1039

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 22  

           Mervyn  Coutindo & Ors. v. Collector of Customs,  Bombay         [1967]  3 S.C.R. distinguished, Badami v. Stale of Mysore  &         Ors.  [1976]  1 S.C.R. 815  distinguished,  Govind  Dattaray         Kelkar and Ors. v. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports &         Ors. [1967] 2 S.C.R. 29 distinguished and doubted.                S.G.  Jaisinghani v. Union of India [1967]  2  S.C.R.         703 distinguished.             Bishan Sarup Gupta v. Union of India [1975] Supp. S.C.R.         491,  Union  of India v. Bishan Sarup Gupta [1975] 1  S.C.R.         104  and  A.K. Subbraman & Ors. v. Union of India  [1975]  2         S.C.R. followed.             The  Court  directed the Government to draw  up  expedi-         tiously a fresh seniority list in the light of the  observa-         tions made in the Judgment. [1058 H]             Obiter:  (Lengthy  legal process,  where  administrative         immediacy  is  the desideratum is a remedy  worse  than  the         malady.   The fact that the present case has taken around  5         working days for oral arguments is a sad commentarY on   the         legal system.  To streamline and to modernise Court  manage-         ment is a cinderella subject in India, as elsewhere. We  too         have miles to go for law and justice to meet).

JUDGMENT:         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 463/76.             (Appeal  by Special Leave from the Judgment  and   Order         dated 11/12-11-1975 of the Gujarat High Court in L.P.A.  No.         113/74).             D.V.  Patel, P.H. Parekh and Miss Manju Jetley  for  the         Appellants.             M.C.  Bhandare,  S.P. Nayar and M.N. Shroff,  for   the,         State of Gujarat.             R. K, Garg and S.C. Agarwala, for Respondents  Nos.  5-6         and 8--11.               M.N. Shroff, for the State of Maharashtra.                The Judgment of the Court was delivered by             KRISHNA IYER, J.--This is a typical ’service’ appeal, by         special  leave, which prompts the topical question:  Is  lit         Wiser national policy to process disputes regarding seniori-         ty, promotion, termination and allied matters affecting  the         public  services,  through  the  docket-bound,   formalised,         methodology  of  the judicature adopting  its   traditional,         time-consuming,  tier-upon-tier  system and  handicapped  by         absence of administrative expertise, accessibility to criti-         cal information and other limitations on the mode and extent         of  relief, or, alternatively, through  built-in,  high-pow-         ered,  but  credibility-wise less  commanding,  agencies  of         composite skills and processes and flexible remedial  juris-         dictions  ? ’Justice and Reform’ is a  recurrent  interroga-         tion.             Our  civil services, if only the static  and  stratified         system   were transformed and the men properly oriented  and         activated, may well prove equal to the dynamic challenges of         our  times  but for the pathetic phenomenon  of  numbers  of         officials  being  locked  in long  forensic  battles.   This         litigative  pathology of the members of the public  services         deplorably diverts the undivided energies, sensitive  under-         standing  and people-based disposition demanded of them  for         the  fulfilment of the Nation’s Tryst with  Destiny  through         implementation of massive         1040         and multiform developmental plans.  Hopefully,  constructive         thinking on impregnable, competent and quick-acting (but not         derobed  or  devalued) intra-structures and  procedures  for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 22  

       improving  and  accelerating the system of  justice  to  the         public services is currently under way.             Now to the merits.  The briefs are big and the arguments         long,  but the factual matrix and the legal  conflicts  lend         themselves to be condensed without detriment.  The  competi-         tion between two categories of members borne on the cadre of         Deputy  Collectors  of  the State of  Gujarat  viz.,  direct         recruits and in-service promotees, on the issue of seniority         inter-se,  with  its  futuristic career  overtones,  is  the         crunch  question  in this civil appeal.  The  grey  area  of         ’service jurisprudence’ covered before us encompasses sever-         al  decisions  and if ’by  good disputing shall the  law  be         well  known’, there has been so much disputation of  learned         length  at  the bar that the legal points should  have  been         more pellucid than the precedents read and re-read made   us         feel.  ’The aid of the purifying ordeal of skilled argument’         when too lapidary and finical reaches a point of no  return,         despite  Megarry  J  to the contrary in  Cordell  v.  Second         Clanfield Properties Lid. (1).             Seven Deputy Collectors, arriving by direct  recruitment         in,  and  after 1963, claim to be ahead,  in  the  gradation         list, of their more numerous counterparts former mamlatdars,         whose  promotional  incarnation as Deputy Collectors,  dates         back to the years 1960-63. The title of these younger incum-         bents to be eider in the Civil List  is primarily founded on         a basic Resolution of Government of July 30, 1959 regulating         recruitment  to  the Deputy Collectors’ cadre by  the  ’then         Bombay  State  adopting a quota basis.  The  Gujarat  State,         carved  out of Bombay and formed on May 1,  1960,  continued         the  system; and so, simplistically presented, the  fate  of         the  ’seniority’ struggle critically turns on the  construc-         tion the Bombay Resolution of 1959 bears, the rival versions         having  been  alternately frowned upon or  favoured  at  the         original and appellate docks of the High  Court.  There  are         other matters of moment debated at the bar and we will  pass         on  some  of them at later stages.   In  administrative  and         legal  terms,  this  case is the projection  of  the  common         rivalry  for  promotional  positions  between  fresh,  young         recruits and old, seasoned promotees, between alleged excel-         lence  of talented youth and tasted experience of   mellowed         age.   Sympathies  may  sway either way  and  reasons  often         spring from sympathies.             To be captiously wise in retrospect may itself border on         vice.  Even  so,  we are constrained to  observe  that  when         government  orders,   as here, have the flavour of  law  and         impact  upon the fundamental rights and equal  opportunities         of  citizens,  they have to be drafted with  the  case  that         legal  orders   deserves lest  avoidable  litigation  should         thrive for no better reason than that administrative  orders         or subsidiary legislation have been drawn up with a  casual-         ness  that betrays the skills of insoucience.  Law  must  be         precise, simple, clear, comprehensive and         (1) [1968] 3 All E.R. Ch. Dn. 746.         1041         there  is  a  duty on the law-maker at every  level  not  to         injure  the community by tengled webs of rules,  orders  and         notifications  whose meaning is revealed only through  tran-         scendental meditation or constant litigation.  in a  social-         istic pattern of society there is hardly any part of nation-         al life or personal life which is not affected by some legal         rule  or other.  When men have to look to the law  from  the         cradle to the grave, making of even subsidiary laws  demands         greatest attention.             To begin with the legal beginning is best done with  the         Bombay  Government Resolution of 1959 after giving a  thumb-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 22  

       nail  sketch  of the relevant service  structure  and  other         minimal particulars.             The  composite  Bombay State, for  purposes  of  Revenue         Administration,  had been divided into Divisions which  were         separate  units  for  promotional  prospects,  liability  to         transfer  etc., of deputy collectors. The routine source  of         recruitment  to these posts used to be mamlatdars  who  were         transferred as deputy collectors by promotion.  As early  as         1939,  a different recruitment policy had been  evolved  for         picking suitable hands from the open market by direct  nomi-         nation.    The  inevitable  concomitant of  a  plurality  of         recruitment categories is  the evolution of a workable  rule         of inter se seniority.  So, by an order of 1941, the mode of         determining seniority between ’nominees’ and ’promotees’ was         settled.  Service, for seniority purposes, so far  as direct         recruits  were concerned, was to run from the date of  their         appointment on probation and, in the case of promotee  offi-         cers,  such service was to begin with promotion in  substan-         tive  vacancies,  if continued without break.   For  reasons         obscure, the direct recruitment scheme of infusion of  fresh         blood-to  use  the usual  validating  vascular  metaphor--to         invigorate  the Administration, hibernated from  1950  until         1959.  However, the crucial government decision of July  30,         1959 not merely re-activated the mode of direct  recruitment         but  fixed  the promotion in which recruitment from the  two         sources  was  to be  made, referred to conveniently  as  the         quota system.  The heart of the  debate before us is whether         a  quota  prescription, willy nilly,   does   postulate  ex-         necessitate  a rota process in practice.  We may  here  read         the resolution itself:                                          Deputy Collector:                                   Recruitment of probationers                         GOVERNMENT OF BOMBAY                         REVENUE DEPARTMENT                    Resolution No. RTC. 1157/99153-D                    Sachivalaya, Bombay, 30th July 1959         Read-Government Resolution-No. 9313/45, dated the 6th Febru-         ary 1950.           Government  Resolution  No. 9313/45, dated the  24th  July         1951.         1042         RESOLUTION:             Government  had  for sometime  under  consideration  the         question of reviving the system of direct recruitment to the         cadre of Deputy Collectors.  It has now been decided that in         the interest of administration, the revival of .that  system         is  quite necessary.  Government  is accordingly pleased  to         cancel  the  orders contained in Government  Resolution  No.         9313/45,  dated  6th February 1950 and those  in  Government         Resolution No. 9313/45, dated the 24th July 1951, in so  far         as  they relate to the recruitment of Bombay  Civil  Service         Executive  Branch Deputy Collectors (Upper Division) and  to         direct  that,  as  far as practicable, 50 per  cent  of  the         substantive  vacancies occurring in the  cadre  with  effect         from  1st January 1959 should be filled in by nomination  of         candidates  to  be selected in accordance  with   the  Rules         appended herewith.                   x        x       x      x      x         By order and in  the name of the Governor of Bombay,                                                   G.L. Sheth                                        Secretary to Government"             We may also extract the portion from the’ annexed  rules         of recruitment pertinent to our purpose:                             "Appointment  to  the  posts  of  Deputy                       Collector  shall be made either by  nomination

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 22  

                     or by  promotion of  suitable                       Mamlatdars:                             Provided  that the ratio of  appointment                       by  nomination and by promotion shall, as  far                       as practicable, be 50: 50."         The  raw  materials government proceedings  needed  for  our         discussion will be complete if the 1941 Resolution also were         read at this stage:                        "GOVERNMENT OF BOMBAY                        Political & Services Department                        Resolution No. 3283/34                        Bombay Castle, 21st November, 1941.         x                x                x         RESOLUTION:             Government  is pleased to direct  that   the   following         principles  should be observed in determining the  seniority         of  direct recruits and promoted Officers in the  provincial         services  (except  the  Bombay services of Engineers,  Class         I)                       (i)  In the case of direct recruits  appointed                       substantively  on  probation,  the   seniority                       should   be  determined with reference to  the                       date of their appointment on probation.                       (ii)  In the case of  officers   promoted   to                       substantive vacancies, the seniority should be                       determined with reference to the (1 ) Date  of                       their promotion to the (2) substantive  vacan-                       cies (3) provided there has                       1043                       been  no break in service prior to their  con-                       firmation in those vacancies.         By order and in the name of the Governor of Bombay                                                  G.F.S. Collins                          Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Bombay                                 Political and Services Department"             Flowing out of the fixation of the ratio between the two         species  of  recruits and having a bearing on the  issue  of         seniority  is  another Resolution of the  Bombay  Government         (continued  during  the relevant period in Gujarat  also  by         virtue of an omnibus circular of May 1, 1960) of February 3,         1960.   This step became primarily necessary on  account  of         the Reorganisation of States and the abolition of Divisions.         The legal fiction of ’deemed dates of commencement of  serv-         ice’  for  the purpose of inter se  seniority  of  personnel         drawn from different pre-Reorganisation States and from  the         Divisions  within  the  State on conversion  of  the  deputy         collectors’  cadre into a State-wide one has  been  crystal-         lised in this rule of February 1960.             One  more clarificatory proceeding of Government,  dated         May  27, 1960 has loomed large in Shri Patel’s  submissions,         especially the Explanation portion thereof and, in a  sense,         it lends some push to the problematic conclusion.  We there-         fore read the relevant Government Circular right here:              No. GSF-1060-F              Government of Gujarat              General Administration Department              Sachivalaya, Ahmedabad, 27th May 1960                        CIRCULAR         Read:  Government Circular No. GSF-1060, dated the  1st  May         1960.                           Doubts  have  arisen  as   respects    the                       directions   given under  Government  Circular                       No.    GSF-1060   dated    the     1st    May,                       1960   ......   To remove any  doubt  in  that                       behalf,  therefore, Government is  pleased  to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 22  

                     direct that the following Explanation shall be                       and  shah be deemed always to have been  added                       to the said circular, namely--                           Explanation :--Nothing herein shall  apply                       to  appointments of officers,  authorities  or                       persons or to the constitution of tribunals or                       other  bodies which may be made by  Government                       on  or after the 1st May, 1960 and the  condi-                       tions of service of the officers,  authorities                       or  persons  appointed or the members  of  the                       Tribunals or bodies so constituted.         By order and in the name of the Governor of Gujarat.                                               Sd/- V. Isvaran                                Chief Secretary to the Government."             Reliance has been placed on the Explanation quoted above         to  emancipate  Government from compliance with  the  Bombay         rules         1044         regarding  appointments of officers or their  conditions  of         service,  an aspect we will expand, if needed.  Prima facie,         while  we agree that the new State is not bound by  adminis-         trative  directions of the parent State and may free  itself         from  it by appropriate steps, an unguided power is  suspect         and  a carte blanche in doing what Government  fancies  with         any of its servants is subversive of ordered societies.   We         have  no further probe to make into this Resolution  in  the         present case and leave it at that.             The  fact  of  the matter is that  during  1959--62,  no         direct  recruitments  were  made but  many  promotions  were         effected.   Afterwards,  i.e.,  in 1963  and  later,  direct         recruits were appointed who, contrary to their legal aspira-         tion, were not assigned seniority over earlier promotees  of         1960--63 vintage, having regard to the factual position. The         further hope that for post-1963 recruits, dates of  appoint-         ment,  and running of service with effect therefrom, on  the         basis of a quota allocation and rota system telescoped  into         it,  proved a plain dupe in the seniority list  prepared  by         government.  The doubly chagrined direct recruits moved  the         High Court for relief, as stated earlier.             The anatomy, in outline, of the deputy collector’s cadre         in   the Gujarat Government and the grievances of the  writ-         petitioners (respondents before us) thus emerge.  On a 50:50         basis the vacancies in the cadre are filled from two sources         viz.,  direct recruitment and promotion from  among  mamlat-         dars.   Once appointed, their seniority gains  saliency  and         turns on length of service, and though no specific provision         to count commencement of service is made in the 1959 Resolu-         tion, it has been understood as set out in the 1941  Resolu-         tion  earlier mentioned.  The contesting  respondents  plead         for  pushing  down  promotees, based on  the  strict  roster         system of 1: 1 going by each vacancy and demur to taking the         year as a unit for adjustment  of ratio.  Which view  should         prevail?  Force, there may be, in the rival versions,  indi-         vidual  injustice there can be whichever view were  accepted         and  precedential pushes and pressures may also  be  brought         into  play  by  either side if we  surrender  to  scriptural         literality of decisions of this Court and miss the thrust of         the ratio therein. In a liner sense, and within the frame of         reference of leading precedents, each case has an  individu-         ality and is a law unto itself.              Strictly  speaking, the primary problem is one of  fair         interpretation  of the basic government Resolution of  1959,         illumined by the purposes and motivations of good government         and unravelling  the implications embedded therein,  against         the  background  of the  administrative  structure,  service

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 22  

       pattern and  seniority  principles,  prevalent contemporane-         ously, as gleaned from the records of the case.   The milieu         aids  the meaning although lawyer’s law leans heavily,  even         lop-sidedly, on judicialized lexicography.  Counsel natural-         ly took us through rulings bearing on the meanings of  words         and  canons  of construction which  merely  re-stated  time-         honoured principles and dictionary culls and did not make us         any  the  wiser  in coming nearer to  a  resolution  of  the         conflict  here.  Likewise, arguments galore on the  connota-         tion of the quota system of recruitment, with  abstractions,         propositions and illustrations based on decided cases,  were         addressed  to us, although we ’came out by the same door  as         in we went’  Common-         1045         sense  is the first aid in the art of  interpretation.   The         only  sure  approach  that judges make  when  confronted  by         complexity in construction and necessity for rationalisation         is on the lines justice Cardozo frankly stated :(1)               "We may figure the task of the judge, if we please, as         the  task of a translator, the reading of signs and  symbols         given  from without.  None the less, we will not set man  to         such a task, unless they have absorbed the spirit, and  have         filled  themselves  with a love, of the language  they  must         read."         Two groups, the promotees who came from the lesser  stations         of  life and the direct recruits who have had better  advan-         tages  of higher education, fight for berths in the  musical         chair.   In  such situations, while construing  rules,  sub-         conscious  forces  have to be excluded  and  objectification         must  be  attempted.  Even so, the  beautiful   candour   of         Benjamin Cardozo whispers to us that we judges                "are ... ever and always listening to the still small         voice of the herd, and are ever ready to defend and  justify         its instructions and warnings, and accept them as the nature         results  of  our own reasoning.  This was  written,  not  of         judges specially, but of men and women of all classes.   The         training of the judge,  if coupled with what is  styled  the         judicial temperament, will help in some degree to emancipate         him  from  the suggestive power of individual  dislikes  and         prepossessions ." ( 2 )           Our  effort in unlocking the meaning of the  controversial         Government  Resolution  of July 1959 and of  other  official         notifications may inarticulately, minimally and unwittingly,         be  moulded  by these broad   under-currents.   Other  facts         relevant for discussion of specific points   urged and other         legal  issues germane to the grounds of attack  and  defense         formulated  by  counsel may be filled in as and  when  those         points  are taken up by us, instead of inartistically  clut-         tering  up or en massee   lugging together  many  government         proceedings,  sequences  of events    and  clarification  of         difficulties  following  on  the  division  of  Bombay  into         Gujarat and Maharashtra, even at this preliminary stage.              The  pivotal questions--one an interpretative  exercise         and  the   other a facet of the fundamental right  of  equal         opportunity--around  which revolve the other  arguments  may         first be set out: (1) If  the Gujarat Government has, by  an         administrative  guideline  or statutory rule  directed  that         open  market recruits and in-service promotees will  be  ap-         pointed  on a 50: 50 basis with the qualification that  this         principle  shall  be adhered to, as far as  practicable,  is         Government  free to ignore such a rule of conduct as  if  it         were  no  inflexible directive, violation  of  which  spells         illegality  on  the appointments made, or does  this  clause         obligate the State flatly to try and comply, but if surprise         circumstances or insurmountable exigencies arise which  make

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 22  

       recourse to the rule impracticable, deviate from it  without         the risk  of  court branding such deviant appointments void?         In short, how far can           (1) Benjamin N. Cardozo: The Nature of the Judicial  Proc-         ess: Yale University Press, P. 174.         (2) Cardozo (supra) pP. 175-176.         1046         administrative  pragmatics influence, without  invalidation,         the  recruitment  mechanics where a narrow  rider  providing         for  imponderable exigencies written into the rule, provides         for  departure ?  (2) Assuming there has to be a  proportion         of 50-50 as above indicated, how is it to be worked out ? On         a rotational basis of the direct recruits inexorably getting         the  first, the third, the fifth and such like vacancies  or         as  an  entitlement to half the total  number  of  vacancies         arising in  the cadre in a particular year or other  conven-         tional  period ? Again, does it further imply an  imperative         obligation  on the part of Government to keep  untilled  all         vacancies  allocable to direct recruits so that they may  be         available  to be filled up in later years  with  retroactive         repercussions and, if such ear-marked posts are, for  admin-         istrative exigencies, filled regularly, not ad hoc, in  sub-         stantive  vacancies, not  ex  cadre posts by  selection  and         promotion,  they must be treated as  provisional  nationally         filled  by direct recruits who may arrive long  later?   And         consequentially, in counting seniority, reckon their  (i.e.,         direct  recruits)  deemed dates of entry as prior  to  those         actually officiating promotee deputy collectors by importing         a  sort  of legal fiction that the direct recruits  must  be         allowed  to  count service from the date when  the  entitled         vacancy  for  direct recruits arose?  May  be  a  diffusive,         digressive  discussion can be obviated and the focus  turned         on  specific  issues if we start with a formulation  of  the         major  points  urged  by Sri D. V. Patel,  counsel  for  the         appellant, hotly controverted, of course, by shri R.K.  Garg         for  the contesting respondents.  Elimination of  the  minor         clears the ring for the major bouts.             The  appellants represent the group of  promotee  deputy         collectors  and the contestants are deputy   collectors  di-         rectly   recruited.   The Gujarat State lines  up  with  the         former, more or less.             We now set out sequentially the six-point  propositional         formulation made by Shri Patel, for the appellants, although         salience  suggests  the  third item as  first--and,  if  .we         anticipate our conclusion, the last in importance.             The  cornerstone of the case, as noted earlier,  is  the         Bombay Government’s Resolution of 1959 fixing the proportion         between  direct  recruits and promoted candidates,  with  an         emergency escape route to jump out of the fixed ratio.  Shri         Patel’s  first point is that once the new State  of  Gujarat         was  formed,  mere administration proceedings of  he  former         government  of  Bombay State ceased to be in  force  proprio         vigore  unless  Gujarat adopted or  continued  or  otherwise         modified them. subject to statutory regulations and  consti-         tutional  limitations.   The State of  Gujarat  had  plenary         executive  power,  granted by the Constitution, to  fill  up         administrative posts in any manner it chose.   The  clarifi-         catory government Resolution of May 27, 1960 issued by   the         Gujarat Government becomes significant in this context as it         contains in explanation which specifically provides that the         adoption  of  the Bombay Government Resolution of 1959  does         not,  in  any way, fetter the Gujarat Government  in  making         appointments  of officers on  or after May 1, 1960 nor  does         the  said 1959 Resolution in any manner restrict the  condi-         tions  of service of such officers.  Therefore, it  is  per-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 22  

       fectly oven to the Gujarat Government to make fresh appoint-         ments to the posts of Deputy Collectors untremmelled by  the         ratio or other         1047         restrictive  conditions  which may be read into  the  Bombay         Government  Resolution  of 1959.  In this view  his  clients         cannot  suffer  even  if  the  Bombay  Resolution  has  been         breached.  (2) Assuming that point No. 1 has no force,  Shri         Patel submits that the various government Resolutions of the         Bombay and Gujarat Governments referred to by   the  parties         are  purely  administrative directions and cannot  have  the         binding status of statutory rules.  Therefore, no rights can         be  derived  therefrom by the direct recruits  or  potential         direct  appointees  and breach of such directives  or  rules         cannot  invalidate appointments made.   (3) On  the  further         assumption  that point no. (2) above is bereft of  substance         and  the Government Resolutions referred to  have  statutory         character, the very terms of the 1959 Government  Resolution         provide a sensible safely value, wisely anticipatory when we         remember  the  pragmatic considerations  and  administrative         exigencies that the slow-moving apparatus of the  Government         of a newly formed State has to face or be puzzled with.  The         1959  Resolution  which is the ’rounding  document’  of  the         rights of the direct recruits itself states that the propor-         tion between the two categories is to be applied ’as far  as         practicable’. Therefore, the rule is neither exception-proof         nor abstractly absolute  but realistic and flexible true  to         life.   Rigidly  to read the rule is surely to  misread  it.         Since it contemplates special situations of impracticability         it is but right for the Court so to construe the Resolution,         in  the  light of the explanation offered by the  State  for         non-recruitment directly until 1963, as to make it  adminis-         tratively viable and reasonably workable If such an imagina-         tive and informed judicial insight plays upon  the rule, the         difficulties in making immediate recruitments from the  open         market  by  the Public Service Commission  may  sufficiently         absolve the State from the supposed violation of  Government         Resolution of 1959 So viewed, the orders of promotion of the         appellants  are in order and unassailable.  (4) &  (5)   The         mandate  of  equality  ensconced in Arts 14  and  16  cannot         handcuff  justice by pushing down the promotees if the  Sen-         iority  List in the face of their actual service  and  legal         appointment.   The attack based on Art. 16 that  the  roster         method  of filling up posts is integral to the quota  system         is  baseless.  Quota without rotate is also  reasonable  and         constitutional as much as quota plus rota. The choice,  both         being  permissible and fair, is left to the  Administration,         the  Court  not ferretting or dissecting  to  detect  deadly         traces  of  discrimination  or  unreasonableness.   (6)  The         assignment  of "deemed dates’ of commencement of service  is         not  unreasonable but is often adopted by  Governments  when         integrating into a common cadre officers  drawn from differ-         ent  States or Departments or divisions.  Novel  compulsions         demand  novel  solutions and law accepts  life’s  expediency         save where the public Vower has been obliquely exercised  or         unreasonableness  is writ large on the face of the  process.         Such  a  stigma being absent, the promotees cannot  be  dis-         lodged from their notches in the ladder.             We are mercifully absolved from making the  discussional         journey over a long mileage covering the poly-pointed formu-         lation since two essential issues may virtually be  decisive         of  the case.  Both sides have agreed to  this  abbreviation         and the other grounds have dropped out of effective  contest         in the long course of arguments.  Enough upto the day!         1048

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 22  

            It  is  fair to state even at this stage  that  be  the         Bombay G.O. of 1959 merely administrative or really statuto-         ry,  both  the learned Single Judge and the  Division  Bench         have head the Gujarat State bound by it.  The rule of law is         tile  enemy  of arbitrary absolutism and the  discretion  to         disobey is a doctrine of despotism and cannot be  subscribed         to  by a Court merely because the state chooses to  label  a         rule or conduct anecting the rights of others an administra-         tive regulation.  In a constitutional order governed by  the         rule  of law, whim or humour, even  if  benignly  motivated,         masquerading  as  executive discretion is anathema  to  law.         When power is vested under the Constitution or other statute         in the State to promulgate rules of conduct attracting  oth-         ers, such rules must ordinarily govern the State and subject         alike.   When there are service rules affecting  the  public         services,  they may either be  in exercise of the  executive         power of the State under Art. 162 or rules with  legislative         colour framed under the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitu-         tion.   It  is fair for the Administration in  a  democratic         system  employing expanding armies of  government  servants,         whose  lot in life and career prospects will be governed  by         recruitment,  conduct  and disciplinary rules,  to  respect,         beyond  suspicion, the rule of law by  exercising  statutory         power  as distinguished from executive power, even where  it         has  an  option.  Of course, in exceptional  situations,  or         sudden  exigencies and for new experiments to be tried,  the         framing  of statutory rules under Art. 309, proviso, may  be         postponed and executive orders immediately promulgated.  The         best  judge  is the State Government  exercising  its  power         justly and efficiently.  For the art of government is  beset         with  the  perils  of a journey through  life’s  jungle  and         textbook  prescriptions can prove ruinous.  We may point  to         another  problem.  It has often been difficult  to  discover         whether a particular set of rules is framed under the provi-         so to Art. 309 or, in mere exercise of Art. 162, although it         is   desirable  that the State makes it explicit.   We  are,         however,  not  called upon  to investigate  this  perplexing         aspect   because,  as stated  earlier,  the High  Court  has         held  that  the State is bound by the Bombay G.O.  of  1959.         Counsel for the appellants, Shri Patel, and counsel for  the         State,  Shri Bhandare, have rightly acquiesed in that  posi-         tion   and proceeded with their arguments on  that  footing.         This point (which is the first) therefore, does not need our         pronouncement.             The  other points, pedentically capable of  being  sepa-         rately dealt with, highlight what we have earlier  indicated         as the two telling questions of law that settle the  outcome         of  the appeal.  We will seek the tight of common  sense  to         solve them and later test the conclusions with reference  to         binding rulings of this Court.           The  first question that falls for considerations,  there-         fore, is as  to   whether the 50:50 ratio ’as between direct         recruits and promoted  hands is subject to the saving clause         ’as  far  as practicable’. Can Government vary the  ratio  ?         Ordinarily  no.    Is it permissible at all  ?     Probably,         yes,  given proof of the government’s case that it was   not         practicable  for the State to recruit from the  open  market         qualified  persons  through the specialised  agency  of  the         Public  Service Commission. The factual basis for this  plea         of extenuation will be examined presently but, according  to         Shri R.K. Garg, appearing for the contestants,         1049         even  if the alibi of the State were true, it  furnished  no         legal  justification for deviation from the  application  of         the rule.  He interpreted, ’as far as practicable’ occurring

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 22  

       in  the Government Resolution, in  a very different way  and         submitted that to adopt the appellant’s view on this  aspect         was  to subvert the substance and nullify the conscience  of         the binding Bombay Resolution of 1959.             Shri Garg argued that the language of the critical  G.O.         was  peremptory,  that  for the high  purpose  of  improving         administrative  efficiency a balanced mix of old  experience         (gained  by  long service) and young  abilities  (proved  by         competitive  selection) was hit upon as  half-and-half  from         each category and the Court could not fall for any construc-         tion of the words ’as far as practicable’ which would  frus-         trate  this goal of overall efficiency unless  the  semantic         search  left   no  other option.  Far from  there  being  no         alternative  interpretation,  the benignant purpose  of  the         Resolution pressed forward to a reasonable meaning that  ’as         far  as practicable’ related not to the tampering  with  the         proportion  of the mix but in permitting provisional  varia-         tions or ad hoc solutions or emergency arrangements to  meet         a difficulty of  the Administration without making formal or         regular  ’appointments’  to the posts  meddling  irrevocably         with the proportion in the prescription. Later, when  direct         recruits  were  secured, they would be  entitled   to  their         quota vacancies and commencement of seniority from the  date         of their appointment.             Logomachic  exercises are the favourite of the  forensic         system but too barren to fascinate the Court and too luxuri-         ous,  in  our penury of time to indulge.   Should  we  chase         decisions  and  dictionaries and finer verbal  nuances  with         explorative industry ?  The sense of the setting, the  ’why’         the  author whispers through his words and the warning  ’not         this.  not  this’ that the objective  understanding  of  the         totality  of  the socially relevant  scheme   instils--these         light  up  the  interpretative track alone  the  criss-cross         woods  of case-law and lexicons.  Led by that  lodestar,  we         will  eye the situation afresh.  In doing so, we must  first         set down the meaning Shri Patel suggests, and Shri  Bhandare         supports,  and  the manner in which these  appellants  claim         that their appointments and seniority are sequestered by the         saving words ’as far as practicable’.             What  does  ’as far as practicable’ or  like  expression         mean, in simple anglo-saxon ?  Practicable, feasible, possi-         ble,  performable,  are  more or  less  interchangeable.   A         skiagraph of the 1959 Resolution reveals that the revival of         the direct recruitment, method was motivated by ’the  inter-         est of administration’--an overriding object which must cast         the benefit of doubt if two meanings with equal  persuasive-         ness  contend.   Secondly,  going by the text,  50%  of  the         substantive  vacancies  occurring  in the  cadre  should  be         filled  in by selection in accordance With  appended  Rules.         ’As far as practicable’ finds a place in the Resolution  and         the Rule.  In the context what does it qualify ?  As far  as         possible 50% ? That is to say, if 50% is not readily  forth-         coming, then  less ?  Within  what period should be  imprac-         ticabilitv  to felt ? What is the content  of  impracticabi-         litv’ in the given  administrative ’setting ?  Contrariwise,         can you not contend that impracticability is         1050         not  a  license  to deviate, a discretion to  disobey  or  a         liberty with the ratio ?  Administrative tone is too  impor-         tant  to be neglected but if sufficient numbers to fill  the         direct recruits’ quota are not   readily available, substan-         tive  vacancies  may be left intact to be   filled  up  when         direct  recruits  are available.  Since  the  exigencies  of         administration  cannot wait, expediency has a  limited  role         through  the  use  of the words  ’as  far  as  practicable’.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 22  

       Thereby Government is authorised to make ad hoc appointments         by  promotion or by creation of ex cadre posts to be  filled         up  by promotees, to be absorbed in the 50% portion  falling         to  the promotional category in later years.  In  short  ’as         far  as  practicable means, not interfering with  the  ratio         which  fulfils the interest of administration, but  flexible         provision  clothing government with powers to  meet  special         situations where the normal process of the government  Reso-         lution  cannot  flow smooth.  It is a matter of  accent  and         import  which affords the final test in the  choice  between         the two parallel interpretations.            We have given close thought to the competing  contentions         and are inclined to the view that the former is the  better.         Certainly,   Shri Garg is right that the primary purpose  of         the  quota system is to improve  administrative  efficiency.         After all, the Indian administration is run for the  service         of  the people and not for opportunities for promotion to  a         few  persons.   But theories of  public  administration  and         experiments  in achieving efficiency are matters of  govern-         mental  policy  and business  management.   Apparently,  the         State,  having  given due consideration  to  these  factors,         thought  that a blended brew would serve best.  Even so,  it         could  not ’have been the intention of government to  create         artificial situations, import legal fictions and  complicate         the  composition of the cadre by deviating from the  natural         course. The State probably intended to bring in fresh talent         to the  extent reasonably available but not at the sacrifice         of  sufficiency of hands at a given time nor at the cost  of         creating a vacuum by keeping substantive vacancies  unfilled         for  long.   The straight forward answer seems to us  to  be         that  the State, in tune with the mandate of the rule,  must         make serious effort to secure hands to fill half the  number         of vacancies from the open market.  If it does not  succeed,         despite  honest and serious effort, it qualifies for  depar-         ture from the rule.  If it has become non-feasible,  imprac-         ticable  and procrastinatory to get the requisite  quota  of         direct recruits, having done all that if could, it was  free         to  fill  the posts by promotion of suitable  hands  if  the         filling  up of the vacancies was administratively  necessary         and  could  not wait. Impracticable cannot be  equated  with         ’impossible’--nor with unplatable--and we cannot agree  with         the  learned judges of the High Court in  construing  it  as         colossally  incapable of compliance.  The short  test,there-         fore, is to find out whether the government, in the  present         case, has made effective efforts, doing all that it reasona-         bly  can, to recruit from the open market necessary  numbers         of qualified hands.  We do not agree that the compulsion  of         the  rule  goes to the extreme extent of  making  government         keep the vacancies in the quota of the direct recruits  open         and  to meet the urgent needs of administration by  creating         ex-cadre posts or making ad hoc appointments or resorting to         other  out-of-the-way expedients.  The sense of the rule  is         that  as  far as possible the quota system must be  kept  up         and, if not prac-         1051         ticable, promotees in the place of direct recruits or direct         recruits in the place of promotees may be inducted  applying         the  regular procedures, without suffering the seats to  lie         indefinitely vacant..             The  next question then is as to whether government  has         satisfied  the  Court that efforts had been made  to  secure         direct  recruits  and failure to secure such  hands  is  the         explanation  for resort to. promotions of  mamlatdars.   The         reason  for delay in making appointments of direct  recruits         during the year 1960, 1961 and 1962 has been set out by  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 22  

       State before us.  It appears that a requisition for 12 posts         of deputy collectors was sent to the Gujarat Public  Service         Commission  on  October 31, 1960 but the  Commission  raised         some  linguistic queries ’regarding the requirement of  ade-         quate  knowledge of Marathi and Gujarati by the  candidates.         Anyway, various points were raised from time to time in  the         correspondence   between the Commission and Government  and,         eventually,  the ’former held a competitive examination  for         the  posts of deputy collectors in July 1962,  declared  the         results in January 1963 and sent up ,its recommendations  in         the  following February.  Government issued orders  for  ap-         pointment of the candidates so selected by the Public  Serv-         ice  Commission in May 1963. This is a working  explanation,         prima  facie good and not rebutted as got up.  If it is  not         necessary  for  the  State Government to  have  recourse  to         recondite  processes of ad hoc appointments  and creation of         ex  cadre posts and if government has taken active steps  in         the  direction of direct recruitment, the exception  to  the         Government Resolution comes into operation.  Direct recruit-         ment  ordinarily involves processing by the  Public  Service         Commission,  an independent body which functions at its  own         pace.   If Government had excluded the posts of Deputy  Col-         lectors  from the purview of the Public  Service  Commission         with  a  view to achieve expeditious recruitment,  it  might         have  been exposed to the criticism that the  normal  method         was being by-passed with oblique motives.  Having looked  at         the  matter from a pragmatic angle, we are  ,convinced  that         the government did what it could and need not have done what         it  ordinarily should not have  done.   Therefore  the  con-         clusion is inevitable--although Shri Garg’s argument  to the         contrary is ingenious--that the  State had tried, as far  as         practicable, to fill 50% of the substantive  vacancies  from         the  open  market, but failed during the years  1960-62  and         that -therefore it was within its powers under the  relevant         rule  to promote mamlatdars  who, otherwise,  complied  with         the  requirements of efficiency.             Now we move on to the more thorny question of quota  and         rota.  Shri  Garg  urges that the  rotational  mechanics  is         implicit in the quota system and the two cannot be delinked.         To  shore up this submission he relies on what he  propounds         as the correct command of the rule of ’quota’.  In his view,         1:  1 simply means one direct recruit or promotee  followed,         vacancy by vacancy, by the other.  To maintain ’the  propor-         tion  in compliance with the quota fixture, Government  must         go  by each post as it falls vacant and  cannot  circumvient         this necessity by year-war reckoning of vacancies and  keep-         ing  up  the  ratio. The counter-view put  forward  by  Shri         Parekh, for the appellant, is that         338SC1/76         1052         quota and rota are not indissolubly wedded and are  separate         and separable.  In the present case, according to him it  is         an   error   to import ’rota’ where the rule has  spelt  out         only ’quota’ as a governing principle.  The Usual  practice,         sanctioned by rulings of this Court,is to go by the year  as         a unit for working out the quota.           Here  a again we are not disposed to hold, having  special         regard  to the recent decisions of this Court cited   before         us that ’quota’ is so the recent decisions of this where the         former is expressly prescribed, interlocked with ’rota, that         where  the  former is  expressly prescribed, the  latter  is         impliedly  inscribed.   Let us logicise a little.   A  quota         necessarily postulates more than one source of  recruitment.         But does it demand the manner in which each source is to  be         provided for after recruitment, especially  in the matter of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 22  

       seniority ?  Cannot  quota stand independent of rota ?   You         may fix a quota for leach category but that fixes the entry.         The    quota    methodology    may    itself    take    many         forms--vacancy-wise   ratio,  cadre  composition-wise   pro-         portion  period-wise or numberwise regulation.  Myriad  ways         can  be conceived of  Rotational or roster system is a  com-         monly  adopted and easily understood method of figuring  out         the placement of officers on entry. It is not the only  mode         in the code and cannot be read as an inevitable consequence.         If  that  much is logical, then what has been done  here  is         legal.   Of course, Shri Garg’s criticism iS that mere  ’qu-         ota’ is not viable without provision for seniority  and,  if         nothing more is found in the rule, the quota itself must  be         understood to apply to each post as and when it falls to  be         filled.  If exigencies of administration demand quick  post-         ing  in the vacancy  and one source (here,  direct  recruit-         ment) has gone dry for a while, then the proper course is to         wait  for  a direct recruit and give him  notional  date  of         entry as of the quota vacancy and manage to keep the  wheels         of government moving through improvised promotions, express-         ly stripping such ad hocist of rights flowing from temporary         occupancy.   We have earlier dealt with the same  submission         in  a slightly different form and rejected it. Nothing  more         remains to be said about it.           What follows and matters on entry into service is seniori-         ty  which often settles the promotional destiny of the  var-         ious brands of incumbents.  Naturally, the inter se struggle         turns  how  best to bend the rules to  one’s  good  account.         Shri  Garg criticised the thoughtways apparent in the  argu-         ment,  backed  by some rulings, that, quota  being  delinked         from  rota,  annual  intake is the unit  for  adjusting  the         seniority among candidates from the two sources.  This is an         innovation   dehors the rule, he says.  We do not think  so.         The question is not whether the year being taken as the unit         is the only course but whether there is anything in the rule         prescribing Government taking it as the unit or  prescribing         some other specific unit.  It is obvious that the Resolution         of 1959 is silent on how to allocate or reckon the quota  as         also on how to compute ’seniority and Government has a  good         alibi for taking the year as the unit and length of continu-         ous service as determining seniority.  The first is  evident         from the .reading of the   1959 Resolution  in the light  of         some  ruling  of this  Court and the second  from  the  1941         Resolution.  Moreover, there is nothing in the Resolution of         1959 preventing Government from treating a year as the unit.         1053         We therefore reach the following conclusions:                       1.  The  promotions   of  mamlatdars  made  by                       Government  between 1960  and 1962  are  saved                       by  the  ’as far as practicable’  proviso  and                       therefore valid,  Here it falls to be  noticed                       that  in 1966 regular rules have  been  flamed                       for promotees and direct recruits flowing into                       the pool      of Deputy Collectors on the same                       quota basis but with a basic difference.   The                       saving  provision ’as far as practicable’  has                       been  deleted in the 1966 rules.   The  conse-                       quence  bears upon seniority even if the  year                       is treated as the unit for quota adjustment.                        2. If any promotions have been made in excess                       of  the  quota set apart  for  the  mamlatdars                       after  rules  in 1966 were  made,  the  direct                       recruits have a legitimate right to claim that                       the  appointees  in excess  of  the  allocable                       ratio  from among mamlatdars will have  to  be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 22  

                     pushed  down to later years when their  promo-                       tions can be regularised by being absorbed  in                       their  lawful quota for those years.  To  sim-                       plify,  by illustration, if 10 deputy  collec-                       tors’ substantive vacancies exist in 1967  but                       8  promotees  were appointed  and  two  direct                       recruits alone were secured, there is a  clear                       transgression of the 50: 50 rule.  The  redun-                       dancy  of 3 hands from among promotees  cannot                       claim to be regularly appointed on a permanent                       basis.   For  the time being they  occupy  the                       posts and the only official grade that can  be                       extended  to  them is to absorb  them  in  the                       subsequent  vacancies allocable to  promotees.                       This will have to be worked out down the  line                       wherever there has been excessive  representa-                       tion of promotees in the annual intake.   Shri                       Parekh,   Counsel  for  the   appellants   has                       fairly conceded this position.                       3. The quota rule does not, inevitably, invoke                       the application of the rota rule.  The  impact                       of this position is that if sufficient  number                       of  direct recruits have not been  forthcoming                       in  the years since 1960 to fill in the  ratio                       due  to  them and  those  deficient  vacancies                       have.  been  filled up  by  promotees,   later                       direct  recruits  cannot claim ’deemed’  dates                       of appointment  for seniority in service  with                       effect from the time, according to the rota or                       ’turn,  the  direct recruits’  vacancy  arose.                       Seniority will depend on the length of contin-                       uous  officiating service and cannot be  upset                       by later arrivals from the open market save to                       the  extent to which any excess promotees  may                       have to be pushed down as indicated earlier.             These formulations based on the commonsense  understand-         ing of the Resolution of 1959 have to be tested in the light         of  decided cases. After all, we live in a  judicial  system         where earlier curial wisdom, unless competently  over-ruled,         binds the Court.  The decisions cited         1054         before  us start with the leading case in Mervyn Coutindo  &         Ors. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay(1) and closes with  the         last pronouncement in Badami v. State of Mysore & Ors.  (2).         This time-span has seen dicta go zigzag but we see no diffi-         culty  in  tracing a common thread of  reasoning.   However,         there  are divergencies in the ratiocination between  Mervyn         Coutindo (Supra) and Govind Dattaray Kelkar & Ors. v.  Chief         Controller of Imports and Exports & Ors.(3) on the one  hand         and  S.G.  Jaisinghani v. Union of  India(4)  .Bishan  Sarup         Gupta v. Union of India,(5) Union of India & Ors. v.  Bishan         Sarup  Gupta(6)  and  A.K. Subbraman &  Ors.  v.  ’Union  of         India(7) on the other, especially on the rota system and the         year  being regarded as a unit, that this Court may one  day         have to harmonize the discordance unless Government wakes up         to the need for properly drafting its service rules so as to         eliminate litigative waste of its servants’ energies.             In Mervyn Coutindo the validity of the rotational system         as  applied in fixing the seniority inter se between  promo-         tees and direct recruits fell for decision in the context of         the specific rule applicable to Customs’ appraisers.  One of         the  principles  in the circular which contained  the  rules         related to the comparative seniority of the two  categories.         ’It provides’, says the Court in summarizing the rule,                           "that  relative  seniority of  direct  re-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 22  

                     cruits  and promotees shah be  determined  ac-                       cording  to the rotation of vacancies  between                       direct  recruits and promotees which shall  be                       based  on the quota of reservation for  direct                       recruitment and promotion respectively in  the                       recruitment  rules.  It was further  explained                       that  a roster should be maintained  based  on                       the  reservation  for direct  recruitment  and                       promotion  in the recruitment  rules.   Where,                       for example,  the reservation for each  method                       is  50 per cent, the roster will run  as  fol-                       lows(1) promotion, (2) direct recruitment, (3)                       promotion, (4) direct recruitment, and so  on.                       Appointments   should  be made  in  accordance                       with  this  roster  and  seniority  determined                       accordingly.   A  question   has  been  raised                       whether the circular of 1940 to which we  have                       already referred survived after this  circular                       of 1959; but in our opinion it is  unnecessary                       to  decide that question, for the circular  of                       1959 itself lays down that seniority shall  be                       determined  accordingly,  i.e.  in  accordance                       with the rotational system, depending upon the                       quota  reserved  for  direct  recruitment  and                       promotion  respectively.  It is this  circular                       which,  according to the respondent, has  been                       followed  in  determining  the  seniority   of                       Appraisers in 1963".,         In  the face of such a plain directive in the relevant  rule         regarding relative seniority for the solution of the problem         that  arises before us where such a seniority  provision  is         absent and the relevant seniority         (1) [1966] 3 SCR 600.           (2) [1976] 1 SCR 815.         (3) [1967] 2 SCR 29.            (4) [1967] 2 SCR 703.         (5) [1975] Supp. SCR 491.       (6) [1975] 1 SCR 104.         (7) [1975] 2 SCR 979.         1055         provision is different, Mervyn Coutindo (supra) cannot be of         any assistance.  That case is authority for the  proposition         it  decides  in  the matrix of the special  facts  and  rule         therein.  In view of the words of the Circular ’that senior-         ity  as  between  direct recruits and  promotees  should  be         determined in accordance with the roster which has also been         specified  ... the inextricable interlinking  between  quota         and rota springs from the specific provision rather than  by         way  of  any general proposition.  Mervyn  Coutindo  (Supra)         cannot therefore rescue the respondents. Nor does the refer-         ence  to a ’service’ being divided into two  parts,  derived         from  two sources of recruitment, help Shri Garg’s  clients.         The rule of ’carry forward’ struck down  in T. Devadasan  v.         Union  of India & Anr.(1) has no relevance ,to  a  situation         where  the  whole cadre of a particular service  is  divided         into  two  parts.  Apart from the fact that it  is  doubtful         whether  Devadasan’s  case survives State of  Kerala  v.N.M.         Thomas  &  Ors. (2) there is no application  of  the  ’carry         forward’ rule at all in fact-situations where two sources of         recruitment  are  designated  in a  certain  proportion  and         shortfalls occur in the one or the other category.  In  such         a case, what is needed is conformity to the prescription  of         the proportion and no. question of carrying anything forward         strictly  arises.  It is true that Mervyn (Supra)  does  not         support  the year by year intake as the yardstick;  but  the         reason is obvious--the rule is specific.             Kelkar  (Supra) also dealt with the ratio prescribed  as         between  direct  recruits and promotees.   Many  grounds  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 22  

       attack were levelled there, one of which was that the  rota-         tional  system would itself violate the principle  of  equal         opportunity  enshrined  in the Constitution (Art.  16(1)  ).         The  Court repelled this contention.  Of course,  promotions         made on an ad hoc basis confer no rights to the posts on the         appointees, as was clearly pointed out in that decision.  In         the  instant case it is common ground that the  appointments         are  not  on a purely ad hoc basis but have  been  regularly         made in accordance with the rules to fill substantive vacan-         cies  except that the promotees have exceeded  their  quota,         direct  recruits being  unavailable.  Kelkar (supra)  stands         on  a  different footing, and hardly advances  the  position         advanced by Shri Garg.             Jaisinghani  (Supra) which has had a  die-hard  survival         through Bishan Sarup Gupta v. Union of India(3) and Union of         India & Ors. v. Bishan Sarup Gupta(4) (if one may refer  to.         the  two  cases flowing out of Jaisinghani (supra)  in  that         fashion), has been referred to by both sides at the bar.  It         was  relied  on by Mr. Garg for the  strong  observation  of         Ramaswami,  J.  that the absence of arbitrary power  is  the         first essential of the rule of law upon which our  constitu-         tional system is based.  He has also drawn attention .to the         suggestion  made in that decision ’to the’  government  that         for  future  years the roster system should  be  adopted  by         framing  an appropriate rule for working out the  quota  be-         tween  direct recruits and the promotees  ......  ’. We  may         straightway  state that our Constitutional system  is   very         allergic  to arbitrary power but there is nothing  arbitrary         made  out in the present case against the  government.   The         second observation in         (1) [1964] 4 SCR 680.        (2) [1976] 1 SCR 906.         (3) [1975] Supp. SCR 491.    (4) [1975] 1 SCR 104.         1056         Jaisinghani (Supra) is of a suggestion that for future years         the  roster system linking up quota with rota, may  well  be         adopted by government.  It is not the interpretation of  any         existing  rule nor laying down of a rule of law, so much  so         we  cannot  have  any guideline therefrom to  apply  to  the         present  case.   The  Government could no doubt,  if  it  so         thought  expedient, frame a specific rule incorporating  the         roster  system so as to regulate seniority.  But  we  should         not  forget that seniority is the manifestation of  official         experience,--the process of metabolism of service, over  the         years, of civil servants, by the Administration--and, there-         fore,  it is appropriate that as far as possible he who  has         actually served longer benefits better in the future.  More-         over,  the  search for excellence receives a jolt  from  the         rule of equality and the State is hard put to it in striking         a happy balance between the two criteria  without impairment         of  administrative efficiency.  Broadly speaking, the  Court         has to be liberal and circumspect where the area is  trickly         or  sensitive, since administration by court writ  may  well         run haywire.             Moving on, we may start off with the statement that  the         last  case  Badami (Supra) lays  down  the  incontrovertibly         harmless principle that quotas that are fixed are  inaltera-         ble according to governmental exigencies.  But there, unlike         here,  no saving provision ’as far  as practicable’  existed         and  here  post-1966 promotees have to suffer  a  push  down         where  their  appointments are in .excess of.  the  promotee         quota.  Nothing directly bearing on our controversy could be         discerned by us in that decision.             Gupta  I  (Supra) an off-shoot of  Jaisinghani  (Supra),         proceeds  on the assumption that the quota is for  .a  year.         Whether  the  rule stated so or not, that was  probably  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 22  

       practice and there was nothing unreasonable in it.  Even  if         the  rule as such had expired, it could, according  to  that         decision,  be  followed as a guideline.  Government  had  to         follow  some guiding principle and not be led by its  fancy,         as each occasion  arose.  Palekar, J. expressed the view  of         the Court thus:                           "When the rule is followed as a  guideline                       and appointments made, a slight deviation from                       the quota would not be material.  But if there                       is an enormous deviation, other considerations                       may arise."         In the present case, prior to 1963, there was departure from         the quota system and that was sanctioned by the rule  itself         because  of special circumstances.  For subsequent  periods,         if  by  taking the year as a unit there  have  been  surplus         promotees  beyond  their allocation even after  taking  into         account  impracticability  of getting direct  recruits  upto         1966 when new statutory rules were enacted, then such spill-         overs, could and should, as indicated by this Court, be  set         off  and absorbed in the later allocable vacancies, the  pro         tempore  illegal  appointments being thus  regularised.   Of         course,   appointees  on an ad hoc basis are  never  clothed         with any rights and have to quit when the exit time  arrives         but  here  there  are none.  In Gupta  II(Supra)  the  Court         ruled:         1057                             "If there were promotion in any year  in                       excess  of  the quota  those  promotions  were                       merely invalid for that year but they were not                       invalid for all time.  They can be regularised                       by  being absorbed in the quota for the  later                       years.  That  is  the reason  why  this  Court                       advisedly  used the expression  ’and  onwards’                       just  to  enable the Government to  push  down                       excess   promotions  to later  years  so  that                       these promotions can be absorbed in the lawful                       quota for those years."         Such  is  the essence of the two Gupta cases  (Supra).   Law         conceptualises anew every time life inseminates it with  new         needs  and  we  have in Gupta the  innovation  of  temporary         invalidity  of  an  appointment-clinically  dead  but  later         resuscitated ?  Jurisprudence burgeons from the left  neces-         sities of society.             A.K.  Subbaraman  (Supra) relying on .Gupta 11   (Supra)         and  going  further, has silenced the direct  recruits  with         reference  to the precise contention now urged by Shri  Garg         that  rota  being imbedded in the womb of the  quota  system         their  co-existence could not be snapped.  While  quota  and         rota may constitutionally co-exist their separation is  also         constitutionally permissible,  if some ’reasonable’ way, not         arbitrary  whim, were resorted to.  Even what is   ’reasona-         ble’  springs from sort of reflexes manifesting social  sub-         consciousness, as it were.  Nothing absolutely valid  exists         and rationality and justice themselves are relative.  Within         these great mental limitations, the Court’S observations  in         Subbaraman (Supra) have to be decided.               This brief and quick survey of decided cases, and  the         submissions  considered  by  us in  the  judicial  crucible,         yield the following  conclusions, leaving aside the question         of  ’confirmation’ in service which, in the Gujarat  set-up,         leaves our controversy untouched:                           (a) The quota system does not  necessitate                       the adoption of the rotational rule in practi-                       cal  application.   Many ways of  working  out                       ’quota’  prescription can be devised of  which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 22  

                     rota is certainly one.                            (b) While laying down a quota when  fill-                       ing up vacancies in a cadre from more than one                       source, it is open to Government,  subject  to                       tests  under Art.  16, to choose ’a  year’  or                       other  period or the vacancy by vacancy  basis                       to work out the quota among the sources.   But                       once  the  Court is satisfied,  examining  for                       constitutionality  the method  proposed,  that                       there  is no invalidity, administrative  tech-                       nology  may have free play in choosing one  or                       other of the familiar processes of  implement-                       ing  the  quota rule.  We, as  Judges,  cannot                       strike  down the particular scheme because  it                       is unpalatable to forensic taste.                            (c)  Seniority, normally. is measured  by                       length of continuous, officiating service--the                       actual is easily accepted as the legal.   This                       does  not preclude a  different  prescription,                       constitutionally tests being satisfied.                       1058                           (d) A periodisation is needed in the  case                       to  settle  rightly  the  relative  claims  of                       promotees  and direct recruits. 1960-62  forms                       period  A  and 1962 onwards forms  period.  B.                       Promotees regularly appointed  during period A                       in  excess of their quota, for want of  direct                       recruits  (reasonably sought but  not  secured                       and  because tarrying longer would injure  the                       administration)  can claim their whole  length                       of  service for seniority even against  direct                       recruits ’who may turn up in succeeding  peri-                       ods.                           (e)  Promotees who have been  fitted  into                       vacancies beyond their quota during the period                       B--the  year being regarded as the  unit--must                       suffer survival as invalid appointees  acquir-                       ing  new  life when vacancies in  their  quota                       fall  to  be filled up.  To that  extent  they                       will  step  down,  rather be  pushed  down  as                       against  direct  recruits who were  later  but                       regularly appointed within their quota.             On  this  basis, the judgment of the High  Court  stands         substantially  modified, but preparation of a new  seniority         list  becomes necessitous. We set aside the  judgment  under         appeal but direct the State Government to draw up de novo  a         gradation list showing inter se seniority’ on the lines this         judgment directs.  The subject has been pending so long that         very  expeditious  administrative finalisation  is  part  of         justice. Officials live in the short run even if Administra-         tions  live  in the long run.  We direct the  State  to  act         quickly.   Lack  of adequate articulation of  simple  points         regarding  rotation and seniority, and the amber light  shed         by  case-law on the questions raised, warrant the  direction         that parties shall bear their costs throughout.             The  unlovely impact of these protracted and  legalistic         proceedings  makes us epilogue, an unusual step in  a  judg-         ment, but pathetically necessitous for the renovation of the         judicial process.  Law is not a ’brooding omnipotence in the         sky’  nor  a sort of secretariat asoterica  known   only  to         higher   officialdom.    But lengthy legal   process,  where         administrative  immediacy  is the desideratum, is  a  remedy         worse  than the malady.  The fact that the present case  has         taken  around  5 working days for oral arguments  is  a  sad         commentary  on the system, which compels litigents  to  seek

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 22  

       extra-curial forums.  Judge Brian Mokenna was right (and the         Indian  judicial  process needs systemic change  ’since  his         wise words apply also to our judicature) when he said:                             "The  fault  is that the  rules  of  our                       procedure  which  by their  discouragement  of                       written  argument  make  possible  extensively                       protracted hearings in open court.  Those  re-                       sponsible  might think more of changing  them.                       In civil cases a written argument supplemented                       by  a short oral discussion, would  sometime’s                       save a great deal of time."         To  streamline  and  to modernise  court-management   is   a         Cinderella  subject in India, as elsewhere. We conclude,  by         repeating what Chief         1059         Justice  Warran  Burger of the U.S. Supreme Court  said,  in         1970, in his address to the American Bar Association:                             "In  the final third of the  century  we                       are  still trying to operate the  courts  with                       fundamentally  the  same  basic  methods,  the                       same   procedures  and  the  same   machinery,                       Roscoe  Pound  said were not  good  enough  in                       1906.   In the super-market age we are  trying                       to  operate  the  courts  with   craker-barrel                       corner  grocer methods and  equipment--vintage                       1900."               We too have miles to go for law and justice to meet.         P.H.P.                                  Appeal allowed.         1060