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

PETITIONER: A. HAMSAVENI

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF T.N.

DATE OF JUDGMENT21/07/1994

BENCH: SAHAI, R.M. (J) BENCH: SAHAI, R.M. (J) SINGH N.P. (J)

CITATION:  1994 SCC  (6)  51        JT 1994 (4)   651  1994 SCALE  (3)656

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:      ORDER 1. We have today pronounced judgment in Union of India v.Rajiv Yadav,  IAS1.   The appeal has been  allowed,  the  impugned judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal has been set aside and the principles of "cadre allocation" for  reserved candidates have been upheld. 2.In  view  of our judgment in Rajiv Yadav  case  1  this appeal  by  the Union of India has to be allowed.   For  the reasons  given  and the conclusions reached by us  in  Rajiv Yadav  case1, we allow this appeal, set aside  the  impugned judgment  of  the tribunal dated 28-4-1992 and  dismiss  the application filed by Ms Anju Gupta before the tribunal. 3.Anju  Gupta is an IPS officer of 1990 batch.   Although she was allocated to Himachal Pradesh cadre, as a result  of the  interim orders of the Central  Administrative  Tribunal she  is  serving in the Uttar Pradesh cadre.  She  has  also undergone  training in Uttar Pradesh in the Hindi  language. In  the  facts and circumstances of this case,  despite  our reversing the tribunal’s judgment, we direct that Anju Gupta shall  continue to be allocated to the Uttar Pradesh  cadre. This  will, however, not debar the Central  Government  from transferring  Anju Gupta from one cadre to another in  terms of  Rule 5(2) of the Cadre Rules on any  justifiable  ground arising  after this judgment.  The appeal is allowed in  the above terms.  No costs. 51