http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: STATE OF PUNJAB

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: HIRALAL & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/12/1970

BENCH: HEGDE, K.S. BENCH: HEGDE, K.S. SHAH, J.C. (CJ) GROVER, A.N.

CITATION:  1971 AIR 1777            1971 SCR  (3) 267  1970 SCC  (3) 567

ACT: Constitution  of  India, Art. 16(1)  &  (4)-Reservation  for backward classes made applicable to initial appointments  as well as promotions Validity of.

HEADNOTE: The  appellant-State  issued  an Order  according  to  which reservation  of  posts  for  Scheduled  castes.  tribes  and backward  classes  was made applicable not only  to  initial recruitment  but  also to promotions.  Respondents 1  and  3 were in the ’State Government service and the former was the senior.  But since the latter belonged to a scheduled  caste he was promoted over. the first respondent as per the Order. The High Court quashed the promotion on the basis that  such reservation might lead to various anomalies. In appeal to this Court, HELD : Article 16(1) provides for equality of opportunity to all citizens in relation to appointment to any office in the service of the State subject to the exception in Art.  16(4) that  the State may make reservations in favour of  backward classes.  The reservation contemplated by Art. 16(4) can  be made not merely to initial recruitment but also to Posts  to which  promotions  are to be made.  Every  such  reservation under Art. 16(4) does introduce an element of discrimination and  promotion  of  junior officers over  seniors;  but  the Constitution makers thought fit, in the interests of society as  a whole, that backward classes should be  afforded  some protection.   If, however, the reservation under Art.  16(4) makes the rule in Art. 16(1) meaningless the decision of the State  would be open to judicial review; but the  burden  of establishing  that a particular reservation is offensive  to Art.  16(1) is on the person who takes the plea. [271 C,  E, 272 D-G, 273 D-F] In  the  present case, there was no material from  which  it could  be  concluded that the impugned Order  violated  Art. 16(1).   The  reservation  could  not  be  struck  down   on hypothetical grounds or on imaginary possibilities. [273 H] General  Manager, Southern Railway v. Rangachari,  [1962]  2 S.C.R. 586 and A. Peeriakarupan etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu, [1971] 2 S.C.R. 430, followed.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1218 of 1968. Appeal  from the judgment and order dated November 29,  1966 of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ No. 271 of 1966. M. C. Setalvad and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellant. The respondent did not appear. 268 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde,  J.-On September 12, 1963, the Government  of  Punjab passed the following order :               "Subject  :-Reservation  for  the  members  of               Scheduled   Castes,   Scheduled   Tribes   and               Backward Classes in promotion cases.               Sir,               I  am  directed to refer you  to  the  subject               noted  above  and  to  say  that  at   present               reservation  for Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled               Tribes   and   other   Backward   Classes   is               applicable  to  new appointments  and  not  to               promotions which are governed by consideration               of  merit  and seniority alone.   Since  those               castes/classes   are  poorly  represented   in               various services in the upper grades under the               State  Govt.-it  has  been  under  the  active               consideration   of   Government   that    some               reservation  in  higher grade  posts  as  well               should  be  made for them.  It  has  now  been               decided  that except in the case of All  India               Services 10 per cent of the higher posts to be               filled by promotion should be reserved for the               members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled  Tribes               and  Backward  Classes (9 per  cent  for  the’               members  of  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled               Tribes  and  1  per  cent  for  the   Backward               Classes) subject to the following conditions :               (a) the persons to be considered must  possess               the minimum necessary qualification; and               (b)   they should have at least a satisfactory               record I of service." Up   till  that  date  reservation  for  Scheduled   Castes. Scheduled  Tribes  and  Backward  Classes  was  confined  to initial  recruitment.  The first out of every  five  initial recruitments  was reserved for, Scheduled Castes,  Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes. On  January  14, 1964, the Government  clarified  its  order dated September 12, 1963.  In this case we are not concerned with the first paragraph of that clarification.  The  second paragraph of that clarification reads thus :               "Government   have   since   been    receiving               references   from  several  quarters   seeking               clarification in regard to the  implementation               of   the   said   decision.    After   careful               consideration  of the matter, it has now  been               decided that :-               (a)   The  said decision should be applied  to               all  promotion  posts already vacant  on  12th               September, 1963, or falling vacant thereafter.               269               (b)   The reservation should not imply that 10               per  cent  of  the total  posts  reserved  for               promotion  in any cadre have to be  filled  by               Scheduled  Castes personnel in the sense  that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

             all existing/ future vacancies will be  filled               up   by  Scheduled  Castes/Tribes  and   other               Backward Classes candidates until their  share               in higher services comes up to 1 0 per cent.               (c)   This provision of reservation applies to               all  State.  services including Class  1,  II,               III,  and IV posts, the only  exception  being               All India Services.               (d)   This  reservation should apply  even  in               the case of short term leave vacancies  unless               it   is   likely   to   involve    unnecessary               dislocation  of work in different offices  and               avoidable expenditure and inconvenience due to               mid-year transfers etc.               (e)   So  far as Scheduled  Castes/Tribes  are               concerned,  the  very first  vacancy  existing               on/arising  after  the 12th  September,  1963,               should retreated as reserved for them and only               if no such official is available for promotion               against  the vacancy reserved for them in  the               first  block  of  10  vacancies,  a  candidate               belonging  to  other Backward Classes  may  be               selected   in  preference  to  the   remaining               officials  against one such post only  out  of               one  hundred, since the reservation for  other               Backward  Classes may not exceed I  per  cent.               However, if Sheduled Castes/ Tribes candidates               are  available  to fill one out of  every  ten               vacancies, the specific reservation in  favour               of other Backward Classes should be the,  51st               vacancy.               (f)   One  reserved vacancy should be  carried               over  to  the next block of ten  vacancies  in               case  it cannot be filled up within any  block               of   ten   posts.   Thus,  if   no   Scheduled               Castes/Tribes/Backward  Classes  candidate  is               promoted against any of the first 10 vacancies               the  number  of vacancies  available  to  such               candidates in the following block will betwo.               (g)   In  case  an out of turn  promotion  has               already been given to a candidate belonging to               Scheduled  Castes/Tribes or  Backward  Classes               against  a  reserved vacancy and then  in  the               same  block  it happens to be the  turn  of  a               candidate belonging               270               to the said castes/classes for promotion, such               candidate should not be ignored on the  ground               that 10 per cent reservation has already  been               exhausted."               Thereafter  by  another letter  of  March  18,               1964,    the   Government    issued    further               clarification  of  their  aforementioned  com-               munications.  That clarification reads               "To illustrate the above point if there is  an               official  of the Scheduled Castes placed at  a               position  say  73rd  in a  list  prepared  for               promotion  to the higher parts and  a  vacancy               arises therein, he would have precedence  over               the  other 72 officials to benefit out of  the               first  vacancy  that occurs on or  after  12th               September,   1963.   Ms  turn  would  not   be               withheld  merely for the fact that his  number               on the select list is not in the first ten." Respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to this appeal were both working in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

the Forest Department of the Government as Head  Assistants. Respondent  No. 1 was senior to Respondent No. 3  Respondent No.  3 belonged to a Scheduled Caste.  Hence in view of  the order of the Government, Respondent No. 3 was promoted  tem- porarily as Superintendent ignoring the claim of  Respondent No.  1. ’Aggrieved by that order Respondent No. 1 moved  the High  Court of Punjab to quash the promotion  of  Respondent No.  3 and direct the Government to promote him as  Superin- tendent in the place of Respondent No. 3. The High Court has quashed  the  promotion of Respondent No. 3.  The  State  of Punjab (now substituted by the State of Haryana) has brought this  appeal  after obtaining a certificate  from  the  High Court under Art. 133(1)(c) of the Constitution. In  the  opinion  of the High  Court  reservation  made  for the  .Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled  Tribes  and   Barckward Classes is not impermissible under the Constitution in  view of  Art., 16(4) of the Constitution as interpreted  by  this Court   in   The  General  Manager,  Southern   Railway   v. Rangachari.(1) But the Government has violated Art. 16(1) by reserving  the  first  out of a group of 10  posts  for  the Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled Tribes and  Backward  Classes. The  High Court was persuaded by the Counsel for  the  first respondent  to  visualise various hypothetical  cases  under which  reservation of the type impugned in the present  case could  lead to various anomalies such as the person  getting the  ’benefit of the reservation may jump over the heads  of several of his Seniors not only in his own grade but even in the higher grades.. They visualised the possibility of  Head Assistant leaping ,over the heads of several seniors of  his in the grade of Head (1)  [1962] 2.S.C.R.586. 271 Assistants  and  thereafter  in the  grade  of  Superintent; subsequently  in  the  grade  of  Under-Secretaries,  Deputy Secretaries  and so on and so forth.  It is not the  finding of  the  High Court that in any of the grades to  which  the impugned  orders apply, the possibilities visualised by  the High Court are imminent or even likely. Art. 16(1) is an extension of Art. 14.  It provides               "There  shall be equality of  opportunity  for               all citizens in matters relating to employment               or appointment to any office under the State." But the equality contemplated by this clause is not an embo- died equality.  It is subject to several exceptions and  one of the exceptions is that provided in Art. 16(4) which  says :               "Nothing  in  this Article shall  prevent  the               State  from  making  any  provision  for   the               reservation of appointments or posts in favour               of  any backward class of citizens  which,  in               the  opinion  of the State is  not  adequately               represented in the services under the State." In   Rangachari’s   case(1)  this  Court  ruled   that   the reservation  contemplated  by  Art. 16(4) can  be  made  not merely to initial recruitment but also to posts to which the promotions  are to be made.  This is what Gajendragadkar  J. (as he then was) speaking for the majority observed (at  pp. 604 & 605) :               "We  must  in  this  connection  consider   an               alternative argument that the word posts  must               refer  not  to selection posts  but  to  posts               filled  by  initial  appointments.   On   this               argument reservation of appointments means re-               servation of certain percentage in the initial               appointments  and reservation of  posts  means

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

             reservation  of  initial posts  which  may  be               adopted  in  order to expedite and  make  more               effective  the  reservation  of   appointments               themselves.   On this construction the use  of               the word posts appears to be wholly redundant.               In our opinion, having regard to the fact that               we  are  construing  the  relevant  expression               ’reservation    of    appointments’    in    a               constitutional    provision   it   would    be               unreasonable to assume that the reservation of               appointments   would  not  include  both   the               methods of reservation, namely, reservation of               appointments by fixing a certain percentage in               that behalf as well as reservation of  certain               initial posts in order to make the reservation               of  appointments more effective.   That  being               so,  this alternative argument which  confines               the word ’posts’ to initial posts               (1)   [1962] 2S.C.R.586.               272               seems  to us to be entirely unreasonable.   On               the other hand under the construction by which               the word ’posts’ includes selection posts  the               use of the word ’posts’ is not superfluous but               serves  a  very important purpose.   It  shows               that  reservation can be made not only in  re-               gard   to  appointments  which   are   initial               appointments  but also in regard to  selection               posts  which may fall to be find by  employees               after their employment.  This construction has               the   merit  of  interpreting  the   words   ’               appointments’  and ’posts’ in their broad  and               liberal sense and giving effect to the  policy               which is obviously the basis of the provisions               of Art. 16(4).  Therefore, we are disposed  to               take  the view that the power  of  reservation               which  is  conferred on the State  under  Art.               16(4)  can  be  exercised by the  State  in  a               proper   case   not  only  by   provided   for               reservation   of  appointments  but  also   by               providing for reservation of selection  posts.               This construction, in our opinion, would serve               to  give  effect  to  the  intention  of   the               Constitution-markers    to    make    adequate               safeguard  for  the  advancement  of  backward               classes  and  to  secure  for  their  adequate               representation in the services." The  extent of reservation to be made is primarily a  matter for the State to decide.  By this we do not mean to say that the  decision of the State is not open to judicial.  review. The  reservation  must  be only for the  purpose  of  giving adequate  representation  in the services to  the  Scheduled Castes,   Scheduled  Tribes  and  Backward   Classes.    The exception  provided in Art. 16(4) should not make  the  rule embodied  in  Art.  16(1) meaningless.  But  the  burden  of establishing that a particular reservation made by the State is  offensive to Art. 16(1) is on the person who  takes  the plea.   The  mere fact that the reservation  made  may  give extensive  benefits  to  some of the persons  who  have  the benefit  of  the  reservation does not by  itself  make  the reservation  bad.   The length of the leap  to  be  provided depends  upon  the gap to be covered.  As  observed  by  the majority in Rangachari’s case(1) :               "The  condition precedent for the exercise  of               the powers conferred by Art. 16(4) is that the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

             State ought to be satisfied that any  backward               class   of   citizens   is   not    adequately               represented  in its services.  This  condition               precedent  may refer either to  the  numerical               inadequacy  of representation in the               services or even to the qualitative inadequacy               of  representation.   The advancement  of  the               socially  and educationally  backward  classes               requires               (1)   [1962] 2 S.C.R. 586.               273               not  only  that  they  should  have   adequate               representation in the lowest rung of  services               but   that  they  should  aspires  to   secure               adequate representation in selection posts  in               the  services  as well.  In  the  context  the               expression  ’adequately represented’  imports;               considerations of ’size’ as well as  ’values’,               numbers as well as the nature of  appointments               held  and  so  it  involves  not  merely   the               numerical  test but also the qualitative  one.               It  is thus by the operation of the  numerical               and  a qualitative test that the  adequacy  or               otherwise  of the representation  of  backward               classes  in any service has to be judged;  and               if  that be so, it would not be reasonable  to               hold that the inadequacy of representation can               and   must  be  cured  only  by  reserving   a               proportionately    higher    percentage     of               appointments at the initial stage.  In a given               case  the State may well take the view that  a               certain  percentage of selection posts  should               also  be  reserved. for  reservation  of  such               posts may make the representation of  backward               classes in the services adequate, the adequacy               of   such  representation   being   considered               qualitatively." It is true that every reservation under Art. 16(4) does  in- troduce  an element of discrimination particularly when  the question   of  promotion  arises.   It  is   an   inevitable consequence of any reservation of posts that junior officers are  allowed  to  take a march  over  their  seniors.   This circumstance is bound to displease the senior officers.   It may  also be that some of them will get frustrated but  then the Constitution makers have thouht fit in the interes’s  of the  society as a whole that the backward class of  citizens of  this  country should be afforded certain  protection  as observed  by this Court in A. Peeriakaruppan etc.  V.  State of Tamil Nadu(1):               "It   cannot  be  denied  that  unaided   many               sections  of this country cannot compete  with               the   advanced   sections   of   the   Nation.               Advantages  secured due to historical  reasons               should   not  be  considered  as   fundamental               rights.  Nation’s interest will be best served               taking  a  long  range  view-if  the  backward               classes  are helped to march forward and  take               their place in line with the advanced sections               of the people." There was no material before the High Court and there is  no material  before  us  from which we can  conclude  that  the impugned  order is violative of Art. 16(1).  Reservation  of appointments  under  Art.  16(4) cannot be  struck  down  on hypothetical (1) [1971] 2 S.C.R.430.

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

807Sup.CI/71 274 grounds  or on imaginary possibilities.  He who assails  the reservation  under that Art. must  satisfactorily  establish that there has been a violation of.  Art. 16(1). For the reasons mentioned above this appeal is allowed  and the order of the High Court set aside.  Respondent No. 1 who was the petitioner before, the High Court is not represented before  this  Court.  In the circumstances of this  case  we make no order as to costs. V. P. S. Appeal allowed. 275