http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: S S. SHARMA & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT10/11/1980

BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. KRISHNAIYER, V.R. REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J)

CITATION:  1981 AIR  588            1981 SCR  (1)1184  1981 SCC  (1) 397

ACT:      Central Secretariat Service Rules-Rule 12 sub-rule 2(a) and Central  Secretariat Service Grade I (Limited Department Competitive Examination  for filling  vacancies reserved for Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes)  Regulation  1979- Whether violates Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.

HEADNOTE:      The Central  Secretariat Service (Amendment) Rules 1979 which inserted  sub-rule (2a)  below sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 of  the   Rules  provided  for  the  holding  of  a  limited departmental competitive  examination, including a statement of the  conditions of  eligibility and  indicating  how  the selection would take place on such examination.      The next  higher category  in the  Central  Secretariat Service above  the Section officers’ Grade consists of Grade I posts.  Recruitment to  the Grade  I posts  are made under Rule 12  of the  Central Secretariat  Service Rules. For the purpose  of  such  promotion  a  select  list  is  prepared. Pursuant to an office Memorandum issued by the Department on 20th July,  1974, 15%,  and 7%, of the promotion posts stand reserved for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes candidates respectively.      The petitioners  were permanent Section officers in the Central  Secretariat   Service  and   officiating  as  Under Secretaries in  different Ministries. They alongwith several other officials  were included in the field of selection for the purpose  of drawing up the select list for the year 1977 for promotion  to  Grade  I  posts.  Twenty-seven  vacancies reserved for  members of  the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, remained  unfilled because no candidate belonging to those categories  was found  suitable. For  the  purpose  of filling those  reserved vacancies,  the Government  of India decided  to   hold  a   limited   departmental   competitive examination confined  to members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.      The petitioners  argued that  (i)  the  reservation  of vacancies for  members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by  the office  Memorandum dated  20th July, 1974 was invalid (ii)  the newly enacted sub-rule (2a) of Rule 12, in the  Central  Secretariat  Service  Rules  and  the  related

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

regulations were invalid and the rule operated prospectively only and  could not  affect the 27 vacancies to be filled in the select  list of 1977. The Respondents took a preliminary objection that  it was  not a  contention raised in the writ petitions and  should not  be allowed  to be  raised for the first time by way of oral submission.      Dismissing the petition. ^      HELD: 1.  The entire  scope of the petitions is limited to challenging  the validity  and application of the Central Secretariat  Service   (Amendment)  Rules,   1979  and   the consequent regulations  for holding  a limited  departmental competitive examination.  No  relief  has  been  sought  for quashing the  office Memorandum  dated 20th  July, 1974.  No ground has  been taken  in the  writ petitions assailing the validity of the office Memorandum. The Courts should 1185 ordinarily insist  on the  parties being  confined to  their specific written  pleadings and  should not  be permitted to deviate from  them by way of modification or supplementation except through  the well-known  process of formally applying for amendment. It is not that justice should be available to only those  who approach  the court  confined in  a straight jacket; but  there is a procedure known to the law, and long established  by  codified  practice  and  good  reason,  for seeking amendment of the pleadings. [1189D-F]      If undue laxity and a too easy informality is permitted to enter  the proceedings  of a  court, it  will not be long before a  contemptuous familiarity assails its institutional dignity and  ushers in  chaos and  confusion undermining its effectiveness. [1189 F-G]      Oral submission  raising new  points for the first time tend to  do grave  injury to a contesting party by depriving it of  the opportunity,  to which  the principles of natural justice  held  it  entitled,  of  adequately  preparing  its response. [1189G-H]      Whether or  not reserved vacancies should be dereserved is a  matter falling  primarily  within  the  administrative discretion  of   the  Government.   There  is  no  right  in candidates  seeking  to  fill  vacancies  belonging  to  the general category  to insist  on  dereservation  of  reserved vacancies so  long as  it is  possible in  law to  fill  the reserved vacancies.  If at  all, a  claim in that behalf can arise only  if no  valid arrangement can be made for filling the reserved  vacancies and  dereservation is  called for by reason of  the prohibition,  in clause (v) of paragraph 2 of the office  memorandum dated  20th July,  1974, against  the carry forward of reservations from year to year in the event of an adequate number of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates not  being  available  in  any  particular  year. Before reaching  this extremity,  the Government acts wholly within its  power in adopting an alternative arrangement for filling the  reserved vacancies.  Dereservation as a process should be  resorted  to  only  when  it  is  not  reasonably possible, within  the contemplation  of  law,  to  fill  the reserved  vacancies.  The  process  of  dereservation  would otherwise be  antagonistic  to  the  principle  embodied  in Article 16(4) and Article 46 of the Constitution. [1190G-F]      3. Once  a decision has been taken to reserve vacancies for a  backward class  of citizens, the programming effected to that  end should  not be disturbed unless the avenues for fulfilling it have been explored and have failed. It is only reasonable  that   the  Government   should  dereserve   the vacancies in  view of  the prohibition against carrying them forward to the next year. [1190 G-H, 1191B]

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

    4. The question of holding the examination arises only, as sub-rule  (2a) of rule 12 declares that when the reserved vacancies cannot  be filled  because eligible  officers from the Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes are not available through the  original process. Resort to the further process arises because  of the  constitutional mandate  in favour of Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  because  reserved vacancies must  be filled  if that  is possible.  It has not been shown that the general category vacancies have remained unfilled for want of suitable candidates. No need has arisen of being  compelled  to  resort  to  a  further  process  of selection  in   regard  to   such  vacancies.  There  is  no requirement in  law that  the select  list pertaining  to  a particular year must be finalized within that year. [1191 E- G, 1192 B]      It is open to the Government to complete the process of selection and  finalise it after the expiry of that year. It seems  that   when  the   Government  found   that  suitable candidates belonging  to the  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes 1186 were not  available for inclusion in the field of selection, it decided  to consider  the advisability  of adopting  some other mode  of filling  the reserved  vacancies. The  select list for  1977, which  included already  ninety-one names of officers appointed  to the  general category  vacancies, was held in abeyance for the purpose of filling the twenty-seven reserved vacancies.  After discussion  with the  Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission and consideration of the alternatives before  it the  Government decided on holding a limited departmental competitive examination. As long as the select list  was not  declared final, no officer could claim any right. [1192B-E]      6. It  is now  well accepted,  and has been affirmed by successive decisions of this Court, that relaxed eligibility criteria would  be justified  in the  case of  candidates of backward classes. The principle finds expression also in the original rule  12 of  the Central Secretariat Service Rules. The record indicates that the lower eligibility standard was decided on after consultation with the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission. [1192-GH, 1193A]      General Manager, Southern Railway v. Rangachari, [1962] 2 S.C.R.  586 M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore [1963] Supply. 1 S.C.R.  434 State  of Kerala  v. N.  M. Thomas.  [1967]  1 S.C.R. 906, affirmed.

JUDGMENT:      ORIGINAL JURISDICTION:  Writ Petition  Nos. 626-630  of 1979.            (Under Article 32 of the Constitution)      Raghubir Malhotra,  Yash Pal,  N. D.  Garg  and  S.  K. Bisaria for the Petitioners.      Miss. A Subhashini for Respondent No. 1.      S. T.  Desai, Miss  Bina Gupta  and Praveen  Kumar  for other Respondents.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      PATHAK,  J.-The   petitioners  have  filed  these  writ petitions under  Art. 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of  the  Central  Secretariat  Service  (Amendment) Rules, 1979  and of  the Regulations made consequent thereto by  the  Union  of  India  for  the  purpose  of  holding  a departmental competitive  examination limited  to candidates belonging to  the Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

filling up  vacancies reserved for those categories in Grade I of the Central Secretariat Service.      The petitioners  are permanent  Section Officers in the Central Secretariat  Service and  almost  all  of  them  are presently officiating  as  Under  Secretaries  in  different Ministries.  The   next  higher   category  in  the  Central Secretariat  Service   above  the  Section  Officers’  Grade consists of  Grade I posts. Recruitment to the Grade I posts are made  under Rule  12 of  the Central Secretariat Service Rules; vacancies are filled by the promotion of, inter alia, permanent  officers  of  the  Section  officers’  Grade  who satisfy certain  prescribed qualifications.  For the purpose of such promotion a select list is prepared. 1187 The preparation  of the  select  list  is  governed  by  the Central  Secretariat   Service  (Promotion   to  Grade  I  & Selection Grade) Regulations, 1964. The select list is to be prepared once every year. The names of eligible officers are arranged in  a single  list by the Department of Personnel & Administrative  Reforms   in  the   Cabinet  Secretariat  in accordance with  the field  of selection  determined by  the Selection Committee. Pursuant to an Office Memorandum issued by the  Department on  20th July, 1974, 15% and 7/12% of the promotion posts  stand  reserved  for  Scheduled  Caste  and Scheduled Tribe candidates respectively.      The petitioners along with several other officials were included in  the field  of  selection  for  the  purpose  of drawing up  the select  list for the year 1977 for promotion to the  Grade I  posts. After  an interview by the Selection Committee, ninety-one  unreserved vacancies were filled from the first  ninety-one candidates  in the  general  category. Twenty-seven  vacancies,   reserved  for   members  of   the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes,  remained  unfilled because no candidate belonging to those categories was found suitable for  including in  the field  of selection. For the purpose of  filling those reserved vacancies, the Government of India  decided to hold a limited departmental competitive examination confined  to members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.  Accordingly, the  President  enacted  the Central Secretariat  Service (Amendment) Rules, 1979 whereby sub-rule (2a)  was inserted below sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 of the  Central   Secretariat   Service   Rules.   Regulations, described  as   the  Central  Secretariat  Service  Grade  I (Limited Departmental  Competitive Examination  for  filling the vacancies  reserved for  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes) Regulations, 1979 were promulgated providing for the holding of  a limited  departmental competitive examination, including a  statement of  the conditions of eligibility and indicating how  the  selection  would  take  place  on  such examination. The  first such  examination was  scheduled for July, 1979.      The case  of the  petitioners in  the writ petitions is that the  Government of  India was  not empowered to fill up the  reserved   vacancies  by  recourse  to  a  departmental competitive examination  for candidates  from the  Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes and that instead the Government should have dereserved the vacancies and made them available to candidates  falling under  the general category. Had that been  done,  the  petitioners  say,  they  would  have  been considered  for   promotion  and,  having  regard  to  their position in  the select  list, they allege that they stood a probable  chance   of  being   promoted  to   Grade  I.  The petitioners pray that the amendment of 1188 Rule 12,  Central Secretariat  Service Rules and the framing

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

of regulations  pursuant to the amendment should be declared ultra vires,  and alternatively  the amendment  of the rules and the  framing of  the related  regulations be regarded as prospective only and not affecting the twenty-seven reserved vacancies pertaining  to the  year 1977.  It is  also prayed that the Union of India should be directed to take immediate steps for  de-reserving the  twenty-seven vacancies  for the year 1977  and upon  such de-reservation  the petitioners be considered for filling those twenty-seven vacancies.      The reservation  of vacancies  for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotion posts from class II to class I of  Government   services  flows   from  the  Department  of Personnel &  Administrative Reforms  Office  Memorandum  No. 10/41/73-Estt. (SCT),  dated 20th July, 1974. Paragraph 2 of the Office Memorandum spells out how the vacancies should be filled up.  The selection is made from among Scheduled Caste and Scheduled  Tribe officers who are within the normal zone of consideration.  If candidates  qualifying on the basis of merit with  due regard  to seniority  do not fill up all the reserved vacancies,  those  remaining  unfilled  are  to  be filled by  selecting candidates  of the  two communities who are in  the zone  of consideration irrespective of merit but subject to  their being  considered  fit  for  promotion.  A select list  is then  prepared of all the selected officers, general as  well as  those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled  Tribes,  arranged  in  the  order  of  merit  and seniority according  to principles laid down by the Ministry of Home  Affairs. For determining the number of vacancies to be reserved  for Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a select list,  a separate  roster  prescribed  by  an  Office Memorandum dated  22nd April,  1970 is  followed. Then,  the relevant provision declares:      "If, owing  to non-availability  of suitable candidates      belonging to  Scheduled Castes  or Scheduled Tribes, as      the case  may be,  it becomes necessary to de-reserve a      reserved vacancy, a reference for de-reservation should      be made  to  this  Department  indicating  whether  the      Scheduled Castes/Scheduled  Tribes candidates  eligible      for  promotion   in  reserved   vacancies   have   been      considered in  the  manner  indicated  in  this  Office      Memorandum." A  further  provision  prohibits  the  carrying  forward  of reservations from  year to  year in the event of an adequate number of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates not being available in any particular year. 1189      Shri Raghubir  Malhotra, appearing  on  behalf  of  the petitioners, opened with the contention that the reservation of  vacancies  for  members  of  the  Scheduled  Castes  and Scheduled Tribes  by the  Office Memorandum dated 20th July, 1974 was  invalid. It  was urged  that the Office Memorandum possessed at  best the  status of  departmental instructions and could  not amend  the Central Secretariat Service Rules. It  is   not,  it   was  said,   a  case  of  administrative instructions filling  any gap or area left uncovered by that body of  rules but,  on the  contrary, it  is a  case  where administrative instructions  have been  made  inconsistently with the  rules. At the outset an objection was taken by the respondents to our entertaining the contention because, they point out,  it is  not  a  contention  raised  in  the  writ petitions and  should not  be allowed  to be  raised for the first time  by way  of oral  submission  in  the  course  of arguments during the final hearing of the writ petitions. It is not  denied by  learned counsel  for the petitioners that the point  has not  been specifically  and clearly raised in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

the writ  petitions, but he asks us to consider it by reason of what  he describes  as "its  fundamental importance".  We have carefully  perused the  writ petitions, and it is plain that the  entire  scope  of  the  petitions  is  limited  to challenging the  validity and  application  of  the  Central Secretariat  Service   (Amendment)  Rules,   1979  and   the consequent regulations  for holding  a limited  departmental competitive examination.  No  relief  has  been  sought  for quashing the  Office Memorandum  dated 20th  July, 1974.  No ground has  been taken  in the  writ petitions assailing the validity of  the Office  Memorandum on the basis now pressed before  us.  We  are  of  opinion  that  the  courts  should ordinarily insist  on the  parties being  confined to  their specific written  pleadings and  should not  be permitted to deviate from  them by way of modification or supplementation except through  the well-known  process of formally applying for amendment.  We  do  not  mean  that  justice  should  be available to only those who approach the court confined in a straight jacket.  But there is a procedure known to the law, and long  established by  codified practice and good reason, for seeking  amendment of the pleadings. If undue laxity and a too easy informality is permitted to enter the proceedings of a  court it  will  not  be  long  before  a  contemptuous familiarity assails  its institutional dignity and ushers in chaos and  confusion  undermining  its  effectiveness.  Like every  public   institution,  the  courts  function  in  the security of public confidence, and public confidence resides most where  institutional discipline prevails. Besides this, oral submissions  raising new points for the first time tend to do  grave injury to a contesting party by depriving it of the opportunity,  to which the principles of natural justice hold it entitled, of adequately preparing its response. 1190      We must,  therefore, decline to entertain the point now raised concerning the validity of the Office Memorandum.      We  shall   now  proceed   directly  to  the  principal contentions raised  in  the  writ  petitions.  It  is  first contended that  sub-rule (2a)  of Rule  12, newly enacted in the Central  Secretariat  Service  Rules,  and  the  related Regulations,   providing    for   a   limited   departmental competitive examination  for members of the Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled   Tribes  are  invalid  because  the  Central Government should have dereserved the twenty-seven vacancies when  it   was  found  that  suitable  Scheduled  Caste  and Scheduled Tribe  candidates were not available for inclusion within the  field of  selection. There  is no  merit in this contention. Whether  or not reserved vacancies should be de- reserved  is   a  matter   falling  primarily   within   the administrative discretion  of the  Government. There  is  no right in  candidates seeking  to fill vacancies belonging to the general  category to insist on dereservation of reserved vacancies so  long as  it is  possible in  law to  fill  the reserved vacancies.  If at  all, a  claim in that behalf can arise only  if no  valid arrangement can be made for filling the reserved  vacancies, and  dereservation is called for by reason of  the prohibition,  in clause (v) of paragraph 2 of the Office  Memorandum dated  20th July,  1974, against  the carry forward of reservations from year to year in the event of an adequate number of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates not  being  available  in  any  particular  year. Before reaching  this extremity,  the Government acts wholly within its  power in adopting an alternative arrangement for filling the  reserved vacancies.  Dereservation as a process should be  resorted  to  only  when  it  is  not  reasonably possible, within  the contemplation  of  law,  to  fill  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

reserved  vacancies.  The  process  of  dereservation  would otherwise be  antagonistic  to  the  principle  embodied  in Article 16(4)  and Article 46 of the Constitution. Paragraph 10.4 in  the Brochure on Reservation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Services, prepared by the Government of India,  provides that  dereservation should  be  proposed only when  such a  course becomes  inevitable  due  to  non- availability  of   Scheduled  Caste   and  Scheduled   Tribe candidates for  appointment against  the reserved  vacancies after having fully observed the procedure prescribed in this behalf and  after applying  relaxed standards in the case of such candidates.  Once a  decision has been taken to reserve vacancies for  a backward class of citizens, the programming effected to  that end  should not  be disturbed  unless  the avenues for  fulfilling  it  have  been  explored  and  have failed. If  the petitioners  can succeed in showing that the provisions in the Central Secretariat Service Rules, and the consequent Regulations, 1191 providing for  holding the  limited departmental competitive examination are  ultra  vires  and  void  and  there  is  no evidence of  any other  appropriate arrangement  for filling the reserved  vacancies they  may have a case for contending that as  there is  no prospect of finding suitable Scheduled Caste and  Scheduled Tribe candidates for appointment to the reserved vacancies it is only reasonable that the Government should dereserve  the vacancies  in view  of the prohibition against carrying them forward to the next year.      That takes  us then to the validity of sub-rule (2a) of rule 12  of the  Central Secretariat  Service Rules  and the Regulations of  1979. Their  validity is  challenged by  the petitioners on  the ground that they violate Articles 14, 15 and 16  of the  Constitution inasmuch  as they result in two avenues of  promotion for  Government servants  belonging to the Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes,  while a single avenue only  of promotion  is available  to other Government servants. Ex  facie,  the  contention  must  fail.  The  two avenues of  promotion pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners consist  in, one,  the preparation  of a list of officers falling  within the field of selection, both of the general category  as well as members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes  and their  selection on  the basis  of the principles laid  down and,  two, the selection of candidates of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes consequent upon the limited   departmental    competitive   examination.   While considering this submission, we must remember that resort to the limited  departmental  competitive  examination  is  not simultaneous with  the preparation of the list embodying the field of  selection. The question of holding the examination arises only,  as sub-rule (2a) of rule 12 declares, when the reserved vacancies cannot be fined because eligible officers from the  Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  are  not available  through  the  original  process.  Resort  to  the further process arises because of the constitutional mandate in favour  of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, because reserved vacancies  must be  filled if that is possible. The petitioners could  complain if  such a need arose in respect of general  category vacancies  and was not supplied. It has not been  shown that  the general  category  vacancies  have remained unfilled  for want  of suitable candidates. No need has arisen of being compelled to resort to a further process of  selection   in  regard   to  such   vacancies.  In   the circumstances, it  is not  possible to  see how a legitimate complaint can  be laid  by  the  petitioners  on  the  basis alleged before  us. It  has been  urged that the decision of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

the Government  not to  dereserve the twenty-seven vacancies is  vitiated   by  legal   malice.  Having   regard  to  the considerations  to   which  we  have  adverted,  we  see  no substance in that submission. 1192      The next  contention on  behalf of  the petitioners  is that sub  rule (2a)  of rule  12 enacted  in  1979  operates prospectively  only   and  cannot  effect  the  twenty-seven vacancies to  be filled  in the  Select List  of  1977.  The argument proceeds  on the assumption that the Select List of 1977 must  be completed during the year 1977. The submission is formed  in fallacy.  There is  no requirement in law that the Select  List pertaining  to a  particular year  must  be finalised within  that year. It is open to the Government to complete the  process of selection and finalise it after the expiry of that year. It seems that when the Government found that suitable  candidates belonging  to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were not available for inclusion in the field of  selection, it decided to consider the advisability of  adopting   some  other  mode  of  filling  the  reserved vacancies.  It   appears  that  on  10th  August.  1978  the Government stated  in Parliament  that as no Scheduled Caste and Scheduled  Tribe officers could be included in the field of consideration proposals for filling the vacancies through some special  method had been taken up with the Union Public Service Commission. The Select List for 1977, which included already  ninety-one  names  of  officers  appointed  to  the general category  vacancies, was  held in  abeyance for  the purpose of  filling  the  twenty-seven  reserved  vacancies. After discussion  with the  Chairman  of  the  Union  Public Service Commission  and consideration  of  the  alternatives before it  the  Government  decided  on  holding  a  limited departmental competitive  examination. As long as the Select List was  not declared  final, no  officer could  claim  any right. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is not possible to say that in holding the departmental competitive examination the Government  was applying  sub-rule (2a)  of rule 12, and the Regulations, retrospectively.      A grievance has also been made of the circumstance that the qualifying  standard for  Scheduled Caste  and Scheduled Tribe  candidates  appearing  at  the  limited  departmental competitive examination is as low as four years approved and continuous service  in the  Section officer’s Grade, while a period of  ten years  is insisted on in the case of officers who do  not belong  to either  class and  are considered for vacancies  in   the  general  category.  The  definition  of "crucial  date"  in  clause  (a)  of  Regulation  2  of  the Regulations of  1979 as  a point of reference qualifying the eligibility standard,  it is  urged, permits  an even  lower eligibility standard for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates. It  is now  well accepted, and has been affirmed by  successive   decisions  of   this  Court,  that  relaxed eligibility criteria  would be  justified  in  the  case  of candidates  of   backward  classes.   The  principle   finds expression also  in the  original rule  12  of  the  Central Secretariat Service Rules. The record before us 1193 indicates that the lower eligibility standard was decided on after consultation  with the  Chairman of  the Union  Public Service Commission.  As  regards  the  number  of  years  of approved service  considered sufficient  for eligibility, we find that  even if we consider ourselves entitled to go into that question  the paucity  of relevant  material  does  not permit us to express any opinion in the matter.      Learned counsel for the petitioners has also challenged

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

the reservation  of the twenty-seven vacancies on the ground that the  vacancies pertain  to  selection  posts.  On  this point, we find ourselves bound by the decision of this Court in General  Manager, Southern Railway v. Rangachari(1) where it has  been held  that Article  16(4) of  the  Constitution extends to selection posts. C      Finally, learned counsel for the petitioners challenges the reservation  of vacancies  on the  ground that  they are irrational, inhibiting and do not provide for healthy growth of the services besides offending the equality provisions of Part  III   of  the   Constitution.  Having  regard  to  the percentage of vacancies reserved under the office memorandum dated 20th  July, 1974,  we consider  that  the  case  falls within the. principles laid down in M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore.(2) The  majority view  in State  of Kerala  v. N. M. Thomas(3) supports the validity of the reservation.      Accordingly, the  writ  petitions  are  dismissed,  but without any order as to costs. N.K.A.                                  Petitions dismissed 1194