Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Valerie Avinash Dhepe And Ors vs Income Tax Department on 2 April, 2025
1 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
Centra
al Adm
ministra
ative Tribuna
T al
Muumbai Benchh, Mummbai
(CAM
MP at N
Nagpur))
O.A.
O No
o.557 O
OF 202
23
THIR
RD MEM
MBER REFER
RENCE
E
(unde
er Sec. 26 of The
T Adm
ministrrative Tribuna
T als Act,, 1985)
Orderrs reserrved on
n :14.2
2.2025
5
Orders pron
nounce
ed on : 02.04
4.2025
5
Hon
n'ble M
Mr. Jay
yesh V. Bhairravia, Membe
M er (Judiicial)
1. Valerie
V e Avina ash Dhhepe D/o Late
L M
Martin Louisee
Anthon
A ny, Age ed about 52 y
years, Occ:- Service
e; R/oo
Flat
F Noo. 301,, Anan
nd Aparrtment, RBI Layou ut, New
w
Jagruti
J i Coloony, Near NIT Garden,
G , Nagppur-13,,
Email:
E Valerie
edhepe
[email protected]; (M) 75886304440.
2. Vikas
V K
Kumarr Singh
h, S/o D Dinesh
h Singh h, Agedd aboutt
32
3 yea ars, Oc
cc:- Serrvice; R
R/O Qtr.
Q No.. 22, Type-2,
T ,
Income
I e Tax Colony,
C , Semin nary Hills, Na
agpur, Email::
Vksing
V gh2k20@@gmaill.com ; (M) 94
404951914
3. Rajat
R A
Agrawaal, S/o Santo osh Kuumar AAgarwall, Agedd
about
a 3
31 yearrs, Occ
c: Service, R/O
O Qtr. No. 31, Type--
2,
2 Income TaxT Co
olony, Semin nary HHills, Nagpur,
N ,
Email;
E Raajat.Agrrawal@
@Incometax.Go ov.In; (M))
940495
9 51988
4. Prajakt
P ta D/OO Arvind
drao Za ged About 42 years,,
ade, Ag
Occ:
O Service; R/O D-
D 1A, 4th Floor,
F S
Saroj Se
easonss
Apartm
A ment, Opposit
O te Fire Enginneering Colleg
ge, Rajj
Nagar,
N N
Nagpur- -440013 Email::
zade.pr
z rajakta
[email protected](MM)758886303776
5. Prakas
P sh S/O O Krishhna Rao Yette, Age ed Abo out 51
Years,
Y Occ:: Serrvice; R/O Flat No. 303,,
Pushps
P sandhyya Apt., Katol Road d, N
Nagpur, ,
Email:P
E Prakashyete4
430@Gm mail.Co
om (M)7758863 304 30
6. Minaks
M shi Ba
awankaar D/OO BalirramjiJiiwanka
ar,Aged
d
About
A 53 Ye
ears, Occ:
O Se
ervice R/O
R Pllot No 58-D,,
Dubey
D Nag
gar, H
Hudke shwar Roa
ad, N
Nagpur,
,
Email:M
E Minaks
shi70baawankaar@Gmmail. Com
m
(M)758
88630459
7. Vijay
V S
S/O Ra amuji Khads se, Ageed Abouut 54 Years,,
Occ:
O Se
ervice; R/O Sai
S Kru upa Flat No.011, Plot No.52,,
P a
annasee Laay Out, Naggpur-4440022,,
Email:K
E Khadse e69@Reediffma
ail.Comm (M) 75
588630 0397
2 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
8. Kamles
K sh S/OO Mano ohar Bh
hoj, Ag
ged Aboout 55 Years,,
Occ:
O S
Service;; R/O Flat No. 1004, D Wing, Yachii
Garden
G n, Bah hadur Gaya, Umee ed Rooad, Nagpur-
N -
440034
4 4 Ema ail: [email protected]
n
(M) 758
886306 681
9. Manju
M Vanja
ani D/OO Latee Harirram To
opwani, Agedd
About
A 53 Years, Occ: Serrvice; R/O
R B
Block No.325,
N ,
Near
N S
Sangeetta Build
ding, J
Jaripatk
ka Colony, Nagpur-
N -
440014
4 4 Ema ail: Man
nju.D.V
[email protected]
n
(M) 758
885785560
10. Dhanra
D aj S/OO Channdrabhaan Dhoote, Ag
ged Aboout 54
4
Years,
Y Occ: Service; R/OO Ff1/
/5 Ma aharaja App.,,
Bhosal
B le Nagar N
Nagpur440024 4 Email:
Dhanra
D [email protected]
om (M) 758866306311
11. Chand
C an Kummar Jh
ha S/OO Jagdis
sh Jha
a, Aged Aboutt
30
3 Yea ars, Occ: Se
ervice; R/O Qtr
Q No
o.12, Type-3,
T ,
Block-A
B A, Bun
nglow No.17,
N C
CPWD Colony
y, Civil Lines,,
Nagpur
N r Ema ail: Jhachanndanoo
[email protected] (M))
942281
9 19371
12. Rishike
R esh Ku umar Shrivasttva S/O
O Hare endra Kumar,
K ,
Aged
A A
About 313 Yearrs, Occ
c: Service; R/O
O Qtr. No.41,,
Type-2
T , Incom
me Taxx Colon
ny, Sem
minary Hills, Nagpur
N r
Email:
E Rish
hikeshkkumar00505922@Gma ail.Com
m (M))
860578
8 84512
13. Prateek
P k Kummar Sinngh S/ /O Parram Prrakash, Aged
d
About
A 34 Yeears, Occ:
O Se
ervice; R/O Plot No.
N 63,,
Zingab
Z baiTaklii, God
dhani Road, Aashirwad Nagar,,
Behind
B d Mah harashttra Em
mporium m, Naagpur Email::
Krsingh
K h. [email protected]
Com (M)) 88605
5147388
14. Kshitij
K Tiwarii S/O S K Tiw
wari, Ag
ged Abo out 35 Years,,
Occ:
O Service, R/O CPWD
C Quarteer No. 109, Type
T 3,,
Block
B 2
2, Sector NW,, Semin
nary Hiills, Na
agpur-4
440006 6
Email:K
E [email protected]
om (M) 94049 952311
15. Kumud
K dini Chhoudha
ary D//O Praabhakarr Wannkhede,,
Aged
A A
About 50
5 Years, Occ
c: Serv
vice, R/
/O Plott No.2,,
Sachin
S n Soc, Narma
N ada Collony, Katol
K R
Road, Nagpur,
N ,
440013
4 3 Emmail: Kumud
K dheman [email protected] (M))
758863
7 30362
16. Himan
H shu S/O La ate Vinndhyach hal Laal Sriva
astava,,
Aged
A A
About 35 Yea ars, Occc: Serrvice R
R/O Qttr. No.
123, Bllock No
o. 03, Type-Iii
T i, New CPWD Colony y, Nearr
T.V.
T To
ower Chowk,
C Seminnary Hills,
H Naagpur Email::
Himan
H shusrivvastava
[email protected](M)8 88080446499
3 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
17. Gaurav
G v Kumar S/O O Pradeeep Prasad K
Kesharii, Aged
d
About
A ears, Occ:-
34 Ye O S
Service R/O Qtr. No.
N 81,,
Type-4
T , Sem
minary Hills, Near CPWD Comm munityy
Hall,
H Email: Lucckyalwa
[email protected] (M))
963136
9 63869
18. Neeraj
N Soni S/O
S Pu
urushotttam Soni,
S Ag
ged About 36
6
Years,
Y Occ:- Service
e; R/O
O Qtr. No. 12 25, Block No.
03,
0 Ty
ype-Iii, New CPWD
C y, Nearr T.V. Towerr
Colony
Chowk
C k, Semiinary Hills,
H N
Nagpurr
Email:N
E Neeraj4
4soni@
@Gmail.Com (M M) 9404 49519337
19. Raj
R Kuumar S/O
S Jaag Natth Sing
gh, Ageed Abo
out 31
Years,
Y Occ: Service;
S R/O C
C/O Ra atnesh Kumarr Karn,,
H.No.
H 28B, Maa
M J
Jagdam
mba Na agri, Near Co
ollectorr
Colony
C y, Godhni, Nagp pur - 441203 Email::
Raj101
R [email protected] (M
M) 9404 4952278
20. Sanjeet
S t Kummar S/OO Anill Prasa
ad, Age
ed Abo
out 333
Years,
Y Occ: Service
e; R/OO Quarter No.170, Type--
3(New)
3 , CPWDD Quaarter, T
TV Tow
wer, Seminary
y Hills,,
Nagpur
N r-440006 Emmail: SSanverm
ma.369
9@Gma ail.Com
m
(M) 942230681166
21. Ajeet
A Kumar Jha S/
K /O Dhu urandh har Jha
a, Aged Aboutt
34
3 Yea ars, Oc
cc: Serrvice; R
R/O Qttr No 110, Type
T 3,,
New,
N C
CPWD Semina
S ary Hillls, Nag
gpur 44
40006 Email::
Ajeetjh
A ha300@
@Gmail..Com (M M) 940495180 01
22. Himan
H shu S//O Jai Bhagwwan, Agged Aboout 33 Years,,
Occ:
O Service; R/O Plot
P Noo. 27, Ujjawa
al Naga
ar, Flatt
No
N 2
201, Iconic Apa
artmentt, Na
agpur-44400300
Email:H
E Himans shusurryan@G
Gmail.CCom (M))
991182
9 29729
23. Anil
A K
Kumar Gupta a S/O Ram Kumarr Saw,, Aged d
About
A 35 Yeears, Occ:
O Se
ervice; R/O Qtr. No.
N 23,,
Type-2
T , Incom
me Taxx Colon
ny, Semminary Hills, Nagpur
N r
Email:
E Anilkum
A [email protected]
Com (M))
790367
7 70971 4
24. Sachin
S n Kum mar S/ /O Sa atyaprak kash Singh, Aged d
About
A 37 Ye ears, Occ:
O S
Service; R/O Incom me Tax x
Quarte
Q er No.10, Ty ype- IIii, Inc
come Tax Colony,
C ,
Semina
S ary Hillls, Near Balaji Tempple, Nag
gpur -4
4400066
Email:
E Sachiinashann.19866@Gma ail.Com
m
04950549
(M)940
25. Rames
R h Channdra Yadav
Y S
S/O Ra am Ashharaya Yadav,,
Aged
A A
About 38 Yea ars, Occ: Service R
R/O Ty ype-III,,
Qtr.
Q N
No. 14,, 3rd Floor, Incom me Taxx Resid dentiall
Colony
C y, Near Balaji Temple
e, Seminary H
Hills, Nagpur-
N -
440006
4 6 Email:ra
E ameshy
y.5090
[email protected] (M))
940495
9 50541
4 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
26. Gaurav
G v V. De
eore. Ag
ged aboout 32 Years, Occ: Service;
S ;
R/O
R H
House No.
N 525 5, Plot No 677, Aash
hirwad Nagar,,
Zingab
Z baiTaklii N
Nagpurr, Email::
Gaurav
G v0900@@Gmaill.Com ((M) 942220843348
27. Kirtika
K a Praka ash D/O Om Prakas sh Sriv
vastava
a, Aged
d
about
a 3
32 yearrs, Occ
c: Serviice R/O
O Qtr. N
No. 47, Type--
2,
2 Income Tax T Co
olony, Semin nary HHills, Nagpur,
N ,
Email:
E Kirtika
[email protected] om (M) 70200 0429333
28. Abhay
A Praka
ash Maurya
M S/O Chand dra Prrakash h
Singh,
S Aged about
a 3 yearrs, Occ
32 c: Serviice: R/
/O Qtr..
No.
N 14 4, Typee-2 (Inc
come TTax), Inncome Tax Colony,
C ,
Semina
S ary Hillls, Naagpur, Email::
Abhay.
A .P.Maurya@In ncometa
ax.Gov v.In (M))
937355
9 57134
29. Saurav
S v S/O Shaile endra Kuma ar, Ageed Abo out 32
2
Years,
Y Occ: Service; R/O Q
Qtr. No.25, Ty
ype-2, Income
I e
Tax
T C
Colony,, Semminary Hills,, Nag gpur, Email::
Saurav
S v2305@@Gmail.Com (M M) 983
35604723
30. Durges
D sh Sing
gh S/OO Shiv P Prasad
d Singhh, Aged Aboutt
32
3 Yea ars, Occc: Serrvice; RR/O Qtr.
Q Noo. 21, Type-2
T 2
(Incom
me Tax x), Incoome T Tax Co olony, Near Balajii
Temple
T e, Se
eminary y Hillls, Nagpur
N r,Mahraashtra--
440006
4 6, Em mail:Duurgesh2 2619911@Gma ail.Com
m (M))
854206
8 62558
31. Harish
H Sharm
ma S//O Parrmeshw war Da ayal Sh
harma,,
Aged
A A
About 35
3 Yearrs, Occ
c: Serviice R/O
O Qtr. No.03,,
Type-2
T Incom
me Tax Colon ny, Sem
minary Hills Nagpur
N r
Email:H
E [email protected] (M))
942250
9 09902
32. Yogesh
Y h S/o Khemch
K hand VVashish
htha Ag
ged About 32
2
Years,
Y Occ: Servic
ce; R/O Qtrr. No. 26, Type-2
T 2
me Tax), Incom
(Incom me Taxx Colon
ny, Sem
minary
y Hills,,
Nagpur
N r Email: Y
Yogesh.
Vashis
V ht100441991@@Gmaill.Com (M)
( 906
674830
086
33. Deepak
D k Karmmkar S/O Du ulal Ka
armkar,, Aged Aboutt
37
3 Yeaars, Occc: Serv
vice; R
R/O Qttr. No. 02, Tyype -4,,
Income
I e Tax Colony,
C Semin
nary Hiills, Na
agpur-4
4400066
Email:K
E Karmkardeep pak@Gm mail.Co
om (M) 9422135894
34. Swapn
S il S/O
O Gaja anan GGirdharr, Age
ed Aboout 41
Years,
Y Occ: Service
S e R/O 402, Mahavi
M r Aparrtment,,
Plot
P Noo 112, Laxmmi Nagaar, Nag
gpur-44
40022 Email::
Kingsw
K wapretu [email protected]
Com (M
M)916799036122
5 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
35. Ashuto
A osh Kuumar S/O Bholan nath P Pandit, Agedd
About
A 43 Yea
ars, Oc
cc: Serrvice; R/O
R Qtr No-2241/2,,
Block
B 29, Cpwd
C Colonyy, Kattol Road, Nagpur-
N -
440013
4 3 Email::
Ashuto
A osh.Kum
mar1@@Income etax.Goov.In (M))
758863
7 30653
36. Rausha
R an Kummar S/O An nandi Prasad
P Singh
h, Aged d
About
A 30 Ye
ears, Occ:
O Seervice R/O CC/O Ratnesh h
Kumar
K r Karn, H.No. 28B, M
Maa Jagdamb ba Nagrri, Nearr
Collect
C tor Collony, Godhn
G ni, Nag gpur, MMaharaashtra--
441203
4 3, Ema ail: Rau
ushankkumar100.Rk k@Gma ail.Comm
(M) 942
228157736
37. Manish
M h Kummar S/O O Phullo Singgh, Aged Abo out 322
Years,
Y Occ: Service;
S R/O B
Bungallow No.. 18, Qtr.
Q No.
76,
7 Typ pe- 3. Block-F
B F Secto
or-New,, Cpwd Colonyy, Civill
Lines,
L Nagpuur Em mail:Mk
kshahaarkundii@Gma ail.Com
m
(M) 942230682 239
38. Mainej
M ar Pras
sad S/O
O Saty
ya Nara
ayan, Aged Ab
bout 322
Years,
Y Occ: Service; R/O
O Qtr.130, T Type-3,, New,,
Cpwd
C Colonny, Se
eminaryy Hills
s, Nagpur Email::
Mainej
M arprasad10@@Gmail.Com (M
M)960446293556
39. Nitesh
N Kuma ar S/OO Surenndra Prasad
P Singh, Aged
d
About
A 31 Yeaars, Occ: Serv
vice; R/
/O Qtr No 114 Type
e
III
I Cpw wd Collony Near TV V Towe er Chow
wk Semminary
y
Hills,
H Nagpuur -4400006 Email:
Niteshc
N cyborg@
@Gmaiil.Com (M) 940 049524
498
40. Ronit
R R
Ranjan
n S/O Ramak
R kant Baarnwal, Aged Aboutt
32
3 Yea ars, Occ
c: Serv
vice; R/
/O Flatt No 40
01, 4th
h Floor,,
Shiv
S G
Govind Orchidd, Nearr Mahaarashtraa Empporium,,
Zingab
Z bai Takli, Godhan
G ni Roa
ad, Na agpur-4
4400300
EmailR
E Ronitranjang@@Gmaill.Com (M) 940 049519904
41. Ankit
A Singh S/O Vijendr
V ra Sing
gh, Age ed Abo
out 33 3
Years,
Y Occ: Service;
S R/O C
C/O Raatnesh Kumarr Karn,,
H.No.
H 28b, Maa
M Jagdammba Na agri, Neear Co
ollectorr
Colony
C y, Godhni
G i, N
Nagpur-44120 03 Email::
Myfirst
M tinbox1
1990@G Gmail.CCom (M
M) 9422 28157443
42. Niranja
N an Kum mar S/
/O Yog gendra Singh,, Aged Aboutt
32
3 Ye
ears, Occ:
O S
Service
e; R/OO Sethhiya Bhavan
B n
Jaistam
J mbh Chowk,
C New TTown Badnerra, Ammdapurr
Dist.
D Amrav
vati, Mahara
M ashtra4444701
Email:A
E Apple.P
Patna@
@Gmail..Com (M
M) 878884872 24
43. Nitin
N K
Khandeelwal S/O Mu ukesh Kumar
K Gupta
a, Agedd
About
A 34 Yea
ars, Occ c: Serviice R/O
O Qtr. No. 16, Type--
2 (Inco
ome Taxx), Incoome Ta ax Coloony, Se
eminaryy Hills,,
Nagpur
N r Emaail: Nitiinkhanndelwal20@Gm mail.Co
om (M))
958849
9 93551
6 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
44. Pooja
P Tomarr D/O Mahe esh Ch hand TTomar,, Agedd
About
A 31 Yea
ars, Occ: Serv
vice; R//O H.N
No. 1100, Moh.
Luhara
L an, Pillkhuwa
a, Hap pur, Uttar P Pradeshh, Pin--
245304
2 4 Em mail: Cspoojjatoma ar@Gma ail.Com
m (M))
940495
9 52045
45. Nidhi
N M
Mishraa D/O Ram S Sevak Mishra
M , Aged Aboutt
30
3 Yea ars, Oc
cc: Serv
vice; R
R/O 117/P1/127 Sh hivpurii
Chhap
C eda Puliya
P Kakaadeo Kanpur
K r-2080
025(Up))
Email:
E Nidhi.IIncome
[email protected]
Com (M)940499519644
46. Awadh
A h Kishore Kummar S/O O Sadaanand Prasad
d, Aged
d
About
A ars, Oc
31 Yea cc: Serrvicer R/O
R C/
/O Bhaagirath
h
Prasad
P d, Nearr Shiv Mandir, Garri Gaon, Khe elgaon,,
Ranchi
R i Emaiil: Awa
adh.Kk
k@Gma ail.Com
m
(M)942
23068178
47. Amit
A K
Kumar Mishrra S/O O Prem m Chan ndra Mishra,
M ,
Aged
A A
About 34
3 Yearrs, Occ:: Servic
ce R/O
O Flat No
N 401,,
Rajshe
R ela Ap
partmennt, Hoousing Colon ny, Dha anbad,,
Jharkh
J hand Email:
E Amit. Mishrra1188 8@Gma ail.Com
m
(M)777
70896993
48. Gaurav
G v Jha S/O
S Biinay Ku
umar Jha,
J Agged About 355
Years,
Y Occ: Service
S e; R/O A/206, Celiino Pa aradise,,
Daldal
D Seonii, Nearr CSEBB Offic
ce, Raiipur, 492014
4 4
Email:
E Gauraavjh37@@Gmaill.Com (M)866
( 8684110
49. Prateek
P k Bachhani S/
/O N.KK. Bach
hchani,, Aged Aboutt
28
2 Yea ars, Occ:
O Se
ervice; R/O G-1077/26, Shivajii
Nagar,
N Nea
ar 5 No. Stop,, Bho opal Email::
Prateek
P [email protected] (MM)9713
3673595
50. Meraj
M A
Ahmad d S/O Md
M Akh hter, Agged Aboout 34 Years,,
Occ:
O Seervice; R/O Qtr.
Q No.. -30, Type
T -2
2, Incom
me Taxx
Colony
C y, Semiinary Hills,
H N
Nagpurr -06 Email: Merajj
Ahmad
A d@Incom metax.Gov.In (M) 94 404951977
51. Santos
S sh Singgh Jadon S/OO Uday yveer S
Singh Jadon,
J ,
Aged
A A
About 28
2 Yearrs, Occ
c: Serviice R/O
O Behind Raii
Hostel,
H , Urw wai Gaate, VVinay Nagar, Sector-2a,,
Gwalio
G r-4740
012, Mpp Email::
Santos
S [email protected]
om (M) 81095 559525
5
52. Mohd
M Nasrud
ddin S/O
S Sa
afruddiin, Age ed Abo
out 35
5
Years,
Y Occ: Servic
ce; R/O Qtrr. No. 45, Type-2,
T ,
Income
I e Tax Colony,
C nary Hiills, Na
Semin agpur-4
440006
6
Email:
E Nasrud
[email protected]
om (M) 94049 951966
53. Nitish
N Kumarr S/O Late N Naresh Yadav, Aged Aboutt
32
3 Yea ars, Oc
cc: Serrvice; R
R/O Qtr. No.. 39, Type-2,
T ,
Income
I e Tax Colony,
C Seminnary Hiills, Na
agpur-44400066
Email:
E Nitish.Ku
umar3@ @Incommetax.G Gov.In (M))
942230
9 01671
7 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
54. Vaisha
V ali Rajeesh Go orle D/
/O Ma anikraoo Chou udhary,,
Aged
A 4
46 yea ars, Jooined aas MT TS On 06.06 6.2011,,
Promot
P ted as s Sr. Tax A Assistan
nt on 22.04 4.2020,,
curren
c tly worrking as
a Sr. Tax As ssistan
nt in th
he O/oo
Pr.
P CIT T (Centtral), Nagpur,
N , Mobille No. 758863 30722,,
Email
E IId- Vais
shaligo
orle2@g
gmail.com
55. Shiny
S Arun Kappen n D/o Augus stine M
M.P, Agged 488
years,
y Joinedd as Stenogr
S rapher Gr. IIII, Currently
y
workin
w ng as Private
P Secretary in
n the OO/o PRR. CITT
(Centraal), Nag
gpur, Mobile
M N
No. 758
886303351
56. Doroth
D hy Fran ncis D/o Bonaaventure Fran ncis, Aged 533
years,
y joinedd as LDC
L o
on 04.10.199 95, cu urrently
y
workin
w ng as Inspector of IIncome e Tax, Promo oted ass
Inspect
I tor from
m 26.08.2016 6, curre
ently wworking g in the
e
O/o
O PRR.CIT (2),
( Mo
obile No
o. 7588863038 83, Emmail Id--
Doroth
D hy.franc cis@Inc
cometaax.gov.inn
... Appplicants
s
(throu
ugh Addvocate Shri Tushar
T Mandle ekar)
Versus
1. Union of India, Thro ough Secretaary too thee
nment of India, Ministry of Fiinance,,
Govern
Departtment of Revvenue, North Block
k, New
w Delhii
110 00
01, Email: Rse
[email protected].
2. Chairm
man, Central
C Board Directt Taxes
s, Miniistry off
Financ
ce, Norrth Blo
ock, Ne
ew Delh hi 110
0 001, Email::
Chairm
[email protected]
3. Pr. Ch
hief Co
ommisssioner of Inc
come T
Tax, Aayakarr
Bhavan
n, Civvil Lin
nes, Nagpur 440 001, Email:
Nagpurccit@IIncome
etax.Go
ov.In
4. Jt. Com o Income Tax
mmissiioner of x (Hq) (Admn
n) O/O
O
Pr.CCIT, Nagpur, Aayak kar Bhhavan, Civil Lines,,
Nagpur 440
0001, Email::
[email protected]
ov.In
5. Manojkkumar Mishra
a, Chaiirman Workinng Com
mmitteee
Constituted Vide Order
O D
Dated. 12.066.2023 of Jt..
Commissioneer of Incomme Tax x(Hq) ((Admn)) O/O
O
Pr.CCIT, Nagpur, Aayak kar Bh havan, Civil Lines,,
Nagpur 4400001, Email::
@Incom
Nagpurpccit@ metax.GGov.In.
6. wa, Nag
IT Sew gpur Un nit, Thrrough its
i Seccretary Kishorr
Shriram
mji Jaadhao, Office at Ro oom No o. 6, Aaykar
A r
Bhavann, Civill Lines,, Nagpu
ur 4400001.
8 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb
(OA No ber referencce decision))
7. Amoli Sandee ep Sak khare, R
R/o 24
4, Jaikrrishna Nagar,,
Police Line Ta
akli, Naagpur- 440013.
8. Jayash
hree Manoha
M ar Nikose, R/o
R Fllat No. 401,,
Shyam
m Sund dar Res sidency
y 3, Ne
ear Ka
alode College,
C ,
Omkarr Nagarr, Nagp
pur- 440027.
9. Deepsh
hika Dharamj
D mji Nandanwar, R/o Plot No.
N 38,,
Behind
d Devik
ka Law
wn, Near Watter Tannk, Mu
ungsajii
Nagar, Umred
d Road
d, Nagpu
ur- 440
0034.
10. Jyoti E
Ellamra
ao Kale
e, R/o Annappurna M
Mata Mandir,
M ,
Gaddiggodam,, Nagpu
ur- 440
0001.
11. Vilas D
Dharmaaji Nan
ndanwaar, R/o Plot No
o. 38, Behind
B d
Devikaa Lawnn, Nearr Wate
er Tankk, Mun ngsaji Nagar,,
Umred d Road, Nagpu
ur- 440
0034.
12. Ashish
h s/o Vitthal
V lrao W
Wagh, Aged
A a
about- major,,
Occ: Servicee, R/oo 84, Dakshata Nagar, Nearr
Pannasse Layo
out, Na
agpur44
40022.
13. Ganeshh s/o Shivajaji Bhuunje, Aged
A a
about- major,,
Occ: Service, R/o Near
N Pacchpoli, First R
Railwayy Gate,,
Golibar Chowwk Roadd, Nagp
pur- 4440018.
... Responndentss
ugh Ad
(throu dvocate Shri Shri
S B.D
D. Panddit for R
R-1 to 5 and
Shri S.J. K Kamle and Shri
S M
M.M. Sudame
S e for private
p e
respoondentss)
ORDER
: Mr. Ja ayesh V. Bha airavia, Memb ber (Ju udiciall) :
The in nstant matterr is a Third Memb ber Refference e underr Sectio o Administrative Triibunal Act 19 on 26 of 985.
2. While decidiing the e OA No.557 7/2023 3 vide orderr d 26.6.2 dated 2024, differen d nce of o opinion n arose e betwe een the e two Hon'ble Mem mbers, sitting in Divisio on Ben nch off Centrral Adm ministra ative Trribunall, Mum mbai Be ench, ca amp att Nagpu ur, as Hon'ble e Memb ber (Ju udicial) of the said Division D n Bench h recorrded hiis findin ngs an nd conc clusion that th he said d 'OA is s Partly y Allow wed' wh hereas while taking the diifferentt view, Hon'b ble Me ember (Admiinistrattive), rrecorde ed his s ndings and co different fin onclusiion to the efffect th hat the e 'OA is s dismiissed''.
9 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision))
3. Since there was differen d ce of opinion n on certain c n points betw ween th he Hon''ble Me embers s while decidiing the e said OA, a referen nce wa as made to Hon'ble Chairm man in n terms s of the provisiions o of Sec ction 26 o of the e Administrattive Trib bunals Act, 1985.
4. Therefo ore, Hon'ble H e Cha airman was pleas sed to o nomin nate th he und dersign ned as a Thirrd Mem mber to hearr and decide d tthe 'po oints off differe ences' as a men ntioned d in the e afores said re eference note with regard to diffferent orders s passe ed by th he Hon n'ble Me embers A No.557/2023 s in OA 3.
4.1 Accord dingly, the Offfice of CAT, Principa P al Benc ch vide e its letter date ed 22.1 11.2024 4 conve eyed th he decision off on'ble Chairm the Ho C an to tthe Reg gistrar/ /HOO of o CAT,, Mumbai Benc ch, cop py to PP PS/PS of the u unders signed.
4.2 In com mplianc ce of the sa aid com mmuniication dated d 2024, the offfice/in 22.11.2 ncharge e camp p at Nagpur N r CAT, umbai Mu B Bench vid de letterr No.CAT T/NAG/ /JUDL/ /1/1/13 374 dated d 26.11.2024 4 forward ded a com mplete set of he th said OA A No.557 7/2023 3,which h was rreceived d by th he Regiistry off CAT, A Ahmeda abad Bench on 28.11.2024 4.
5. Before ad dverting g to o the s points off differences/ /referen nce witth rega ard to Orderrs pass sed by y both the Hon'ble Memb bers, it is nec cessary y to th hrow a ce on the brief glanc b f facts o of the case,, whic ch are e summ marized d as un nder: -
5.1 It is notice ed tha at vid de "Offfice O Order" dated d 6.2023 (Anne 12.06 exure P-01 (((pages 90-93
3)) (wh hich is s impugned in the OA), the t res sponden nt no.4 4 hereiin had d consttituted a wo orking commiittee for fo veriification and d prepa aring de etails for f cond ducting g Revie ew DPC Cs since e 1997 7 till da ate in the Gro oup 'B' and Grroup 'C C' cadre es and for the e said purpo ose, th he worrk scop pe of the s said working w g 10 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) comm mittee and SOP S h have allso be een prrovided more e partic cular in n paras s 3 to 6 thereiin.
For F rea ady refference, the said imp pugned d orderr dated d 12.06 6.2023 is reprroduced d as un nder:-
"OF FFICE ORDER Date e: 12/06 6/2023 Working g Comm mittee f for verrification n and prepar ring details d ffor cond ducting Review DPCs siince 199 97 till date in the Group 'B' and Group 'C' cadr res is c constituted hereund h der:
Sr.N NO. Name of the Offficer / Design nation O Official 1 Shhri Manoj Kumar M Mishra, Chairp person DCCIT 2 Shhri Pankaj aj Shastri,, ITO Vice C Chairpers son 3 Shhri Gajanaan S. Wa arhekar, Memb ber ITO O 4 Shhri Amit Sardar, S IT TO Memb ber (SC repres sentation)
n) 5 Sh hri Deepa ak Kumarr, ITI Memb ber 6 Sh hri Suprattim Biswas, ITI Memb ber (SC repres sentation)
n) 7 Sh hri Bimal Mahto, ITTI Memb ber 8 Sh hri Sagar Patil, Sr. TA Memb ber 9 Sh hri Ved Prrakash, Memb ber Steenograph her Grr. I 10 Sh hri Shekhar K. Ma adavi, TA Memb ber (ST repres sentation)
n)
2. Th he Chairrman an nd Memb bers aree name based and a would w pe erform th heir functtions wheerever they are be eing postted.
Shri S Bim mal Mahtoo, ITI and d Shri Saagar Patill, Sr.TA aare attach hed to t the O//o Pr.CCIIT, Nagpu ur as, OS SD till 10thh July, 20 023.
3. 3 T The work k scopee of the e workinng commmittee and a SOP S with regard d to cond ducting Review DPCs is as unde er-
a.
a T
The Com mmittee is entrrusted withw the e work of
examini
e ing the directioons giveen in CB BDT's leetter dated
27.05.2
2 019 regarding prospect
p tive impplementa ation of NR
Parmar
P Judgem ment annd also o examiining in nstructio
ons
issued vvide DoP PT OM No. N 200 011/2/20 019-Estt.. (D) dated 13.08.2021 in Civil C Apppeal No. 8833-8 8835 off 2019 off K Meghach M handra Singh &Ors & Vs s Ningaam Siro &Ors and a effective e e im mplemenntation of the e sa aid directio d ns/instr ructions in tthe Na agpur rregion by reviewin r ng DPCs since R..Y 1997 to the DPCs D tilll date b.
b T The Comm mittee is s instru ucted to strictly follow the directio d ns issue ed vide DOPT D OM M NO 360012/2/96 6 Estt (R Res) dated d 0 02.07.19 997 on the bac ckdrop of RK Sabharw wal judgeme j ent of the Ape ex Courrt and also in nstructio ons issued in the DOPT OM O N. 336012/116/2019--Estt. (RRes) dated d 112.04.20022 on the backdrop of Jarn nail Sinngh judgeme j ent of th he Apex Court.
C 11 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) c.
c Th he Committee is s instru ucted to strictly follow the direction d d in DOP s Issued PT OM N No. 36033 3/16/80 0-Estt. (SSCT) dated d 2 27.02.19881 and DOPT O OM No 36011/3 3 3/2005-E Estt. (Res.) da ated 09.009.2005 regardingg verifica ation of ccaste sta atus at a every importan nt upturn of emplo oyee's career d.
d Thhe Comm mittee iss instruccted thatt reserve ed categ gory officers/o o officials V who have h not submitte ed caste validity as mandate ed by the e MAHAR RASHTRA A ACT No o. XXIII O OF 2001 will not be coonsidered d for prom motion frrom theirr current designattion keeping k in view the t ratio decidend di in the matter oof 'The Chhief Regional R l Officer, Orienta al Insuran nce Com mpany Vs s Pradip' of Hon'ble H S Supreme e Court inn the Civ vil Appeaal No. 7442/2020 0 as under-
u "Pro otecting the t serviices of a candidaate who iis found not to t belong g to the communitty or tribe e for whoom the reeservation n is intended i d substan ntially en ncroaches s upon leg gal rightss of genu uine members s of the reserved r commun nities whoose just eentitleme ents are a nega ated by thhe grant of o a seat to an ineeligible pe erson."
e.
e T
The Coommittee e with
h the assis
stance of
adminis
a stration would examin ne the cases
c of reservved
category c y candiidates who w ha ave pass sed Dep partmenntal Examina E ation (ITO/ITI/ I/Ministeerial etc.) on n gene eral standar s rds for r imple ementatiion of 'own merit' in promoti p ion as per ex xtant O OMs off DoPT& & inter rim directio d ns of Ho on'ble daated 28..01.2022 2 in Jarrnail Sin ngh and a Orss. V. Lachhmi Na arain Guupta and d Ors. aand thereeby publish p the listt of such h candid dates wiith detaiils thereeof. The rep presenta ation, iff any, will be e decide ed by the Committ C tee withh the app proval of the coompetentt author rity and a in cases off ICTs etc. e wheere the mark m shheet of the officer/o o official for the c concerneed Deppartmenntal Examina E ation iss not av vailable on the office rrecords the same s m may be conside ered as passed d against relax xed standar s rds and d the onus o wiill be on o the concern ned officer/o o official to pro ovide s supportiing doc cument to substan s ntiate his s claim of pass sing at general g s standarrds, if any. TThe fina al decisiion in reespect of 'own mmerit' sh hall be b taken n by DPC C.
4. 4 The C Committe ee is also o instruccted to follow fo DO OPT OM No. 22013/1 2 1/97 Estt. (D) dated d 133.04 199 98 and rectify the Omissionns, factu ual mistakes p procedura al irregu ularities as detailed d below while Reviewing thhe DPCs since s 199 97- i.
i Th he Comm mittee is informe ed that ini the case of ShriS Ashok A N Manapu ure proceedural irrregularity y was co ommittedd by not consiidering th he sealedd cover pprocedure e in the o original DPC D of o AO Grr III for VY.
V 2013-14 and a also subs sequent ppromotionn in the t AO G Gr.II for V.Y. V 20200 although h he was s exoneraated from m all charges c vide Dissciplinary y authorrity orderr dated 27.10.20 016 under u Ru ule 11 off the CC CS(CCA) R Rules, 19965. The e above fact f should s b be consiidered by b the C Committee while conductting Review R D DPCs.
ii.
i Thhe Comm mittee iss informmed thatt CAT o order daated 24.03.20 2 023 in OA A 75/202 22 in the e case off Shri Maanish Kummar S/o S Jhallak Singhh is to im mplemente ed The above a jud dgement can c be b implem mented by b operating sealled coverr procedu ure, howe ever there t waas proced dural irreegularity y in cond ducting s sealed co over procedur p re and therefore e the sa ame is to be rrectified by conductin c ng Review w DPC The T latestt status ofo ICC pro oceedings & status s att DA's offfice shall be ensurred.
12 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) iii.
i Thhe Comm mittee is s instruccted to consider Shri K S. Jadhao J against UR categ gory insttead of SC S categ gory, as the official o h has joinedd this ch harge agaainst UR category y as per the office o reccords an nd the saame is to o be rectified in the Review DPCS.
D iv.
i Thhe Comm mittee is instructted to coonsider S Shri Sanj njay Mahajan M n againstt UR cate egory insstead of ST categ gory, as the official o h has joinedd this chharge aga ainst UR category y as per the office o reccords. The Commiittee is allso instru ucted to cconsider him h against a tthe Admiinistrative e line of p promotio on as perr his requ uest applicatio a on v.
v Thhe Com mmittee is info ormed to t impllement the disciplina d ary authhority ord der unde er rule 11 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, R 1 1965 da ated 27..08.2010 0 wherein the disciplin nary authority a y has ordered o that Shrri Sanja ay L. Pa ande to be considere c ed as the t cand didate be elonging to the unreserv ved category c (UR) frrom the date off cancelllation off his Ca aste Certificatte by the Sch hedule Tribe Certificat C te Scruttiny Committe ee, Nagp pur Divission, Naagpur, i.e ew.e.f 03 3/11/20009. According A gly his seniority s should b be re-fixeed in the unreserv ved category c (UR) and d no ben nefits ava ailable to o the Sch hedule Trribe candidat c te shouldd be giveen to himm w.e.f. 03/11/20 0 009. vi. The T Committe ee is infoormed to impleme ent Pratibbha Ran ni judgemment of o the Ho on'ble Sup preme Coourt prosp spectivelyy i.ew.e.ff 10.04.20019 in i the Innter Charrge transfsfer cases s. The promotion n orders will be b subjecct to the outcome of review w petitionn filed in n the casee of Sanjay S K Kumar Pa athak in the t apex court an nd also su ubject to the outcome o of OA'ss filed in i the ju urisdictio onal CAT T Bench at Nagpur.
N vii.
v Th he Comm mittee is instructeed that seniority s of Shri S.J Wasu sh hall not be disturb bed as H Hon'ble CAAT has ggiven inte erim relief in h his case and alsoo senioritty of Dire ect recruiit Inspecttors namely Shri Ch hetan De eshmukh,, Shn Rajiv R K Singh, Shri S Shashi S B Bhushan n Ojha, Shri S Ratnnesh Kumar Karrn and Shri S Nitin N Kum mar shail also nott be distu urbed as per the d directionss of Hon'ble H C CAT.
viii.
v Thhe factuaal mistak ke comm mitted in the casee of Shri SK Wagh in considerring him for prommotion in the cadrre of Priv vate Secretary S y (PS) in the Reviiew DPC C held in the yearr 2020 after af foregoing f g for proomotion although a he wass not connsidered for promotio p n in thee cadre of o PS inn the Oriiginal DP PC is to be rectified in the pre esent Review DPC Cs.
5. Thhe Commmittee is entrusted e d with th he work o of dispos sing the t reprresentatio ons receeived in this reggard andd preparring documen d nts/folderr's for th he purpoose of ho olding Re eview DPPCs since s R.Y Y 1997. The committee ch hairman will hold d meeting g of committe c ee membe ers from time to time andd submit the Review DPC D fold ders at the e earliestt.
6. Thhis orde er is isssued w with prio or appro oval of the Competent Authority."
(emphas sis suppliied) 5.2 On re eceipt of the e afore esaid Office O Order dated d 12.6.2023, A Applica ant Nos s.1 to 3 had filed f eir obje the ections s and raised r grievan nces by b way of rep presenttations dated d 16.6.2023, 15.6.2023 an nd 15.6 6.2023 respec ctively before e 13 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) the respon ndent No.3, i.e., the Prin ncipal Chieff Comm mission ner, Na agpur (A Annexu ure P-26 (Page es 411 to 421 refer).
presenttations, the applic eir rep In the cants mainly y raised d objec ctions in i resp pect to the sc cope off work of the e Comm mittee and th he stan ndard of proc cedure (SOP), more e partic cularly, conta ained in n claus ses 3(b
b), (d) a and (e) in the e said impugn i ned ord der date ed 12.0 06.2023 3. Accord dingly, the applica a ant by way of the e said d representatiion, re equeste ed the comp petent authorrity to o withd draw th he work k entru usted tto the workin ng com mmittee e includ ding th he SOP P as stip pulated d in cla auses ((b) and d (e) off Para 3 off the said impug gned office o order dated d 12.06 6.2023..
5.3 Beforre th
he s
said repres
sentatiions dated
d
15.6.2023/1 16.6.20 023 su ubmitte ed by the t app plicantts no.1 to 3 herein could have been b considerred an nd decid ded by y the co ompete ent autthority,, the sa aid app plicants s (work king as s Incom me Tax x Inspe ectors) along g with other 50 sim milarly y situatted offi ficials had h ed the presen file nt OA N No.557 7/2023 3 underr Sectiion 19 of the Adm ministra ative Trribunals Act,, 1985 before e the CAT, C M Mumbai Bench h, cam mp at Nagpur, N , along g with a an app plication being MA No.649 N 9/2023 to file e the said s OA A jointlly on 13.7.20 1 eeking the folllowing 023, se g reliefs s:-
(1) This Hon'ble e Tribun nal may y quash h and s set asid de the impugne ed "offiice orde er" issu ued by tthe Join nt Comm missioner of Income I Tax, (H HR) (Ad dm.), O//O the P Pr. CCIT T, Nagpu ur on 12-06-20 023 {ANN NNEXURE E-
P-01} as the same is s arbitrrary, ba ad in law w for th he groun nds stated in this t app plication.
(2) Direc ct the respond r dents to o follow w the mandate given n by the e Hon'ble Suprreme Co ourt of India in i Kum.. Madh huri Pa atil Vs. Addl. Comm missione er, Triba al Deve elopmen nt (199
94) 6-S SCC-24 AND in i Chairrman and a Man naging Directo or FCI a and Or rs.
14 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Vs. J Jagdish h Balara am Bah hira an nd ors (2017) 8 SCC 6701, before e initia ating any a pro ocess of o grantting pr romotion n to th he "rese erved c category y"
perso ons and d mand date the em to insist i fo for "valiid caste e certificate"" as per section s n 3 o of Maha arashtra a Act 23 3 of 2001.
(3) Restrrain th he resp pondentts from m grantting an ny reserrvation, in pro omotion n, to Sc cheduled d Caste es or Sc chedule ed Tribes, in exercis se of th he powe er confe erred by b Artic cle 15, 16 (4 4A) (4(B B) of th he Consttitution n of In ndia, w withoutt, in tthe firs rst insta ance, carrying o out th he n necessar ry prelim minary exerciise of a acquirin ng qua antifiable data indicatting ina adequac cy of rep presenttation, of o the s said ca ategories s, in se ervice, and ev valuatin ng the s situatio on by ta aking iinto considera ation th he said data a, along w with the t co ompetin ng consiideratio ons of backw wardnes ss and d overa all efficiiency in ad dministrration, and arrivin ng empirrical decision d n on tthe ba asis the ereof as a direc cted by Hon'ble e Supre eme Co ourt of India in i JARN NAIL SIINGH V LACCH HMI NA ARAYAN N GUPT TA {2022 2- 10-SC CC-595}}. And b by Delh hi High Court in i All In ndia Eq quality Forum Vs Uniion of IIndia WP W (C) 34 490/201 10. (4) Restrrain the e respon ndents ffrom im mplemen nting th he OM d dated 11.07.20 1 002, 31 1.01.20 005, 10..08.201 10 in th he mattters of grantin g ng prom motion tto SC/S ST candidates on the basis o of "own n merit concep pt"
as th hese OM Ms are non-exis n stent in n the ey yes of th he law as on today due to o judgm ment pa assed by b Hon'b ble Punjjab and d Haryan na High h Court in CWP P:-
13218 OF 2009 9 deciided on o 15..07.201 11 {ANNE EXURE--P-09} and a on accoun nt of O OM date ed 30.09 9.2016 issued by DOP PT {ANNE EXURE--P-12} (5) Direc ct the responde re ents to protect the prromotio on given n to petitioners s as Inc come Ta ax Inspectors in i 2022 2 along with th heir intter-se- seniorit s ty as th he said senior rity ha as been n given as per th he preva ailing la aw and judgme ents.
(6) Pass any other order in the t fac cts an nd circu umstanc ces of th he case e, in the e largerr interes st of jus stice."
15 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 5.4 It emerrges fro om the e record ds thatt on 19 9.7.202 23,afterr hearing the learne ed counsel fo or the applica a ants, and the e learned ounsel co for t the offficial respon ndents,, who o appea ared on n receip pt of th he advance copy of the sa aid OA,, as well w as the learned d coun nsel fo or inte ervenerrs, the e Tribu unal ha ad issu ued nottice in this OA O and at the e same e time, by w way off interrim orrder diirected the officiall respo ondents s 'to co ollect th he data a but no n furtther acttion on n the re eport off the Co ommitte ee shalll be tak ken till next da ate'.
5.5 The offficial respon ndents and private p respon ndents s had filed ttheir replies r and d denied the c claim of the e cants a applic and ha o raised a prreliminary obj ad also bjection n aboutt the m maintaiinability y of th his OA on the e groun nd thatt the OA O is p prematu ure sin nce the e competent a authoriity has s yet not n dec cided the t rep presenttations subm mitted by b the e applic cants.
Accord ding to the res sponde ents, att this s stage, there is s no in nfringem ment off any riight of the ap pplicants as there is s an in nbuilt provisiion in the iimpugn ned ord der th hat the e Comm mittee w will/sh hall inviite the representatio on(s) fro om the e conce erned employ yees and a will cons sider tthe sa ame in n consu ultation n with the co ompeten nt auth hority. Furthe er it is s stated d thatt since e the impug gned order o is pure ely an n admin nistratiive ord der and no a adverse e orderr whattsoeverr had been passed d again nst the appllicants, the OA is s required to b be dism missed only on n this ground g d alone..
The re espondents had h als so expllained in the e reply y that the t dec cision to stitute the Committe t cons ee is ju ust and d prope er and the sa ame can nnot be e said to be d depriva ation off any right r off the ap pplican nts and d have also pllaced re eliance e on va arious g grounds and judgme j ents.
6. Therea after, on co onclusion of o the argu uments s advan nced by the learned d coun nsel forr the p parties before e 16 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) the said s D Division Bench of tthe CA AT, Mu umbai Bench h (camp p at Na agpur), the Ho on'ble M Member (J) wrrote an n Orderr dated d 26.6 6.2024 wherein by onsiderring co v various s judgm ments passed d by th he Hon n'ble Apex A Co ourt an nd the e Hon'b ble Hig gh Cou urts as well a as insttruction ns/guid delines s issued by th he DoP P&T thrrough v various s OMs, on the e pointt of app plicability of Article A 16 (4) and Article A 1 16 (4A) of the e Consttitution n of Ind dia in the t matter of grant o of reserrvation n in pro omotion C/ST candida n to SC ates as also on n the point p off on of claim of SC/ST ca consideratio andida ates forr theirr promotion o on its 'o own merit', m h had rec corded observ vations s and finding f s in pa aras 54 4 to 61 1 and paras p 6 69 and d 70 off Orderr, which read as und der:
"54. F From th he case laws d discussed above, it is i clear r that S State is i not bound d to make m rreservattion in n promottion for r SC/ ST S cand didates but iff it dec cides to o make reserva ation i in prom motion,, it ha as to collectt quantiffiable data d ind dicating g that there is inadeq quacy off represe entation n of SC//ST can ndidates s mainttaining overalll efficien ncy in adminis a stration n.
55. Itt is per rtinent to note e that the t resp pondentts have e not co ollected any data d in n regar rd to iinadequ uacy off represe entation n in pr romotio on and mainta aining overalll efficien ncy in adminis a stration n. The data w which th hey are e collectiing vide e impug gned offfice or rder datted 12th t June, , 2023 is s with respectt to own n meritt and o on the basis b off the OM M dated d 12th April, 2022 on the e backd drop off Jarnaill Singh h's judg gement of the Apex C Court. Learned L d counsel for th he appllicants conten nded tha at ther re is no o rule, rregulation, la aw, no otification, ex xecutive e order r empow wering th he respondents s to imp plement the pr rinciple e of 'own n merit'. For im mpleme enting the t principle of 'own n merit', there has to be either r rule, notifi fication,, executiive orde er and legislat l tion. In the abs sence off any off these, p princip ple of 'o own me erit' can nnot be implem mented.. He con ntended d that OM da ated 11 1th July ly, 200 02, 31stt Januarry, 200 05 and 10th A August, 2010 h have be een sett aside b by the judgem ment off Punjab b and H Haryan na High h Court iin Lach hhmi Na arayan Gupta versus Jarnail Singh h in CWP P No. 13 3218 off 2009.. He sub bmitted d that there t is s no rule e, notifiication,, executtive ord der, legiislation n which h 17 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) authorizes the e respo ondents to imp plementt the pr rinciple e of 'own n merit'' enunciiated by the Supreme S e Courtt in the e case off R.K. Sabhar rwal (su upra). Learned L d couns sels for r the res sponden nts, Sh hri B. D D. Pan ndit an nd Shri M. M..
Sudam me for th he intev venors a and Mr.. S. J. K Kamble for the e officiall respon ndents submitt s ted that in the e case of o Anita a Rai Sa axena (s supra), relianc ce was placed d on OM M dated d 10th Au ugust, 2010.
2 Th hey furrther su ubmitted d that Bombay B y High C Court in n the case c off Union n of In ndia & Others s versus All Ind dia Inco ome Ta ax SC/ST T Emplloyees Welfare W e Federation & Others s, Writ Petition n No. 8 8986/20 011 has s placed relianc ce on OM O dated 10th August, A , 2010 despite e pointin ng out th hat Pun njab and d Harya ana Hig gh Cour rt in the e case of Lach hhmi Na arayan Gupta a and Others versus s Jarnaill Singh h and Others O (s supra) has h sett aside the OM M dated 11th Ju uly, 200 02, No.. 36028 8/17/20 001-Esttt. (Res.)) issued by DoP PT, OM dated 3 31st Ja anuary, 2005 and a OM M dated 10th Au ugust, 2010.
2 E Even if we hold d that the OM M dated 1 10th Au ugust, 2010 2 is not sett aside in view w of the e judgem j ment of Bombay B y High C Court in n the ca ase of Union U off India & Othe ers ver rsus All India a Incom me Tax SC/ST T Employ yees We elfare Federat F tion & Others,, Writ Petition P n No. 8986/2011, stilll the re esponde ents do o not sttand to o gain be ecause of the underttaking given g b by the learned l d Solicito or Gene eral in Supreme S e Courtt.
56. L Learned couns sel forr the applic cants f further r submits s that learned Solic citor Ge eneral had giiven an n underta aking in i the Suprem S me Courtt that ttill suc ch time,, the ma ain mattter alo ong witth the Contem mpt Petiition is s decided d, no further f r promo otion of o reserved ca ategory y persons s to un nreserve ed posts s will be b made e on Do oPT OM M dated 10th Au ugust, 2010 2 a and Raiilway B Board Circular C r dated 14th Septemb S ber, 20
010. Accordin A ngly, OM O No..
36012//11/201 16-Estt. (Res.) d dated 30 3 th Sep ptember r, 2016 6 was pa assed by y the Do oPT in w which itt is statted that in the e light off the undertak king giv ven by the lea arned Solicitor S r Genera al, till such tim me that the SLP Ps are d decided d by the e Suprem me Cour rt, whille consiidering promottion, th he DoPT T OM da ated 10 0th Aug ugust, 2 2010 and a Ra ailway Board d Circula ar dated d 14th Septemb S ber, 201 10 are n not to be e relied d upon. H He sub bmitted that tthe und dertaking still holds s good as per th he judg gement of Kera ala High h Courtt in the e case off Union of Indiia & Orrs Vs Sam Div vanni & Ors in n OP CA AT No. 102/2 2020. Learne ed cou unsel f for the e respond dents submitte s ed that this un ndertak king wa as given n in the y year 20
016. The ereafterr, Supre eme Cou urt in the case e 18 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) of Jarn nail Siingh an nd Othe ers ver rsus La acchmi Narain n Gupta and Otthers in n SLP N No. 3062 21/2011 1 has directed d d that pe endency y of Spe ecial Lea ave Petiitions s shall no ot stand d in the way of o Unio on of IIndia taking t steps for f the e purpose of promot p tion frrom reserved to re eserved,, unreserrved to o unres served a and allso in tthe ma atter off promottion on merits s. He su ubmitte ed that words in the e matter of promotion on merrits ind dicate tthat Sta ate can n give pro omotion n by imp plemen nting priinciple of 'own n merit'.
57. L Learned couns sels ffor the e resp pondentts and d interve enors, Mr. M B D Pand dit and d Mr. M M Sudame S e respecttively submitte s ed thatt in the e matte er of State S off Mahara ashtra & Anr. versus Vijay Ghogre G & Ors. SLP S No..
28306//2017, Suprem S me Courtt has pa assed a an order r that itt is mad de clear r that the t Union of India I is s not de ebarred d from f m making g prom motions in accordanc ce witth law,, subjectt to furtther ord ders, pe ending further f r consid deration n of the m matter. Kerala a High C Court in n OP (CA CAT) No. 149 off 2020 d dated 18 8th Janu uary, 20 021 in para p 14 4 held thus:-
t " 14. As already stated, the priincipal q question n to o be con nsidered d is wh hether the t unde ertaking g giiven by the Sollicitor G General before b tthe Apex x C Court sttill hollds goo od. The e orderr dated d 5//6/2018 of the Apex A Co ourt only y indica ates thatt th he promotion shall be ca arried out in n ac ccordan nce with law. As s rightly y pointed out by y le earned counsel c f for resp pondents s, the sa aid order r ca annot be b interp preted tto mean n that reserved d ca ategory memb bers ca an be oted promo to o unreserve ed postts. App parently,, the Railway y B Board's clarifica c ation da ated 19 9th Jun ne, 2018 8 ba ased on OM datted 15 th h June, 2018 ca annot be e utilized for effe fecting p promotiion of reserved d andidates to un ca nreserve ed candidates u unless itt is s based on o meritt."
58. C Co-ordin nate Ben nch at B Bangalo ore of th his Trib bunal in n the ma atter off Shri Basavar B raja C.E E. & A Another r versus s Union o of India a & Ano other in n OA No o. 386/2 2020 da ated 2ndd June, 2 2023 ha as also held h to the sam me effec ct.
59. T Thus, Kerala High h Cour rt helld tha at the e underta aking given g b the S by Solicito or General beffore the e Apex C Court sttill hold ds good d and what S Supreme e Courtt has pe ermitted d is to o make promo otions iin acco ordance e with la aw. It ha as furth her held d that cannot c be inte erpreted d to mea an tha at rese erved c category ry mem mbers c can be e promotted to unreserv u ved postts.
19 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) In this view off the ma atter, w we do no ot find a any hes sitation n in hold ding that the underttaking given g b by the learned l d Solicito or Gene eral stiill holds s good.. For th his reas son, no o further f r promo otions for fo the rreserved d categ gory per rsons to o unreserrved po osts willl be ma ade base ed on D DoPT OM M dated d 10th Au ugust, 2010 2 a and Raiilway Board B C Circular r dated d 14th Se eptembe er, 2010
0. Therrefore even e if iit is he eld thatt the OM M dated d 10th August, 2010 0 is se et asid de, stilll promottions as s conten nded by y the re esponde ents can nnot be e made in view w of th he unde ertakin ng given n in Supreme e Court.
60. L Learned coun nsel fo or the e resp pondents s and d interve enors su ubmitte ed thatt on th he basis of Supreme e Court jjudgem ment in the ma atter off Jarna ail Sing gh and d Others versus Lachhm mi Nara ayan Gu upta an nd Othe ers, SLP P No. 3 30621/2 2011, DoPT has issue ed OM M No..
36012//16/201 19-Estt. (Res.) d dated 12 1 th Aprril, 202
22. This s OM rea ads thus s:-
" Office e Memorrandum m Subject: Reservat R tion in p promotio ons proc cedure to o e follow be wed prio or to eff ffecting reserva ations in n th he matte er of pro omotion ns by all departm ments off th he Centtral Gov vernmen nt. The undersiigned is s directed to bring g to you ur notice e the jud dgementt da 8.01.202 ated 28 22 of tthe Sup preme C Court off In ndia in the case e of Jarrnail Sin ngh and d Ors. V. V La achhmi Narain n Gupta and Or rs. (Civill Appeal N No. 629 of 202 22 arising out of SLP P (C) No o.
30621 off 2011) and oth her con nnected matters s.
ursuantt to this Pu s judgem ment, th he Ld. A Attorney y G General for f India a has rrendered d his con nsidered d op pinion in n the ma atter.
2. In the jud dgement dated 28.1.20 022, the e Supreme Court has h set o out the conditio ons thatt are to be e satisfiied by tthe Gove ernmentt for the e urpose pu of im mplemen nting the t po olicy off re eservatio on in promoti p ions. Th hese co onditions s are:
(i)) Colllection of quan ntifiable data re egarding g in nadequa acy of represe entation of Sc cheduled d C Castes an nd Sched duled Trribes;
(iii) App plication n of this data to eac ch cadre e se eparatelly; and (iiii) If a roster exists, tthe unit for operration off th he roste er would d be th he cadre e for wh hich the e 20 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) qu uantifia able datta would d have to be c collected d and appllied in regard r tto the filling f up p of the e va acancies s in the roster T This judg gement currently c y holds the field d.
3. All the e Ministtries/Dep partmen nts are required d to o ensur re thatt the above ons conditio are e co omplied with before b im mplemen nting th he policy y off reservation in n promo otions an nd carry ying out any prom motions based b th hereon.
4. For th his purpo ose, all Ministriies/Depa artinents s are also required r d to ensu ure the following f g:
(a
a) In ter rms of DOPT O OM No.4 43011/15 53/2010 0-
E Estt (Res s.) dated d 4.1.20 013, the Liaison n Officer r sh hall ens sure tha at the rreservattion ros sters are e sttrictly main ntained as perr the e in nstructio ons/guid delines, laid dow wn in D DOPT OM M N No. 36012 2/2/96-E Estt (Res s.), dated d 2.7.1997.
(b
b) In ord der to en nsure ma aintenan nce of effficiency y off admin nistratio on, the e DPC shall c carefully y as ssess th he suita ability of the officers s, being g co onsidere ed for pr romotion n.
(c
c) The Appointi A ing Autthority shall s is ssue the e ap ppointm ment/promotion orders s only y after r sa atisfying g itself that the e condittions me entioned d in n paragraph 2 and sub-para (a) ( & (b)) of this s pa aragrap ph have been b fullly comp plied witth.
5. Since the Jarnail Siingh ba atch of cases is s ending in the Suprem pe me Courtt of Ind dia, any y prromotion order r issued d shall be su ubject to o fu urther orders o that m may be passed by the e Supreme Court in n the saiid batch h of case es.
6. All Miinistries//Departm ments are a requ uested to o urgently bring th hese ins struction ns to th he notice e off all the eir attac ched/sub bordinate offices s as also o th he Publiic Secto or Underrtakings s and S Statutory y B Bodies etc. f for ad dherence e and strict co omplian nce."
61. F From th his OM, Suprem me Cou urt has only directed d d collectiion of quantifi q iable da ata rega arding inadequacy off represe entation n of Schedul S led Cas stes an nd Sch heduled d Tribes, Appliication of th his da ata to each cadre e separately an nd If a roster r e exists, the t unitt for op peration n of the e roster r woulld be the ca adre fo or which the e quantiffiable data would w have to t be collecte ed and d applied d in reg gard to o the fillling up p of the e vacan ncies in n 21 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) the ros ster. It nowhere says s that the t principle of 'own n merit' w would be b consiidered ffor prom motion. Thereffore, we e do not find an nything g wrong g in Cla ause 3(b
b) in imp mpugned d order d dated 12 1 th Jun ne, 202
23. So far f as clause 3(e) off impugn ned ord der as regard ds imp plementa ation of o 'own n merit' is con ncerned d, they y can not im mpleme ent the e princip ple of 'ow wn mer rit' in viiew of the t unde ertakin ng given n by the learned d Soliciitor Gen neral wh hich stiill hold ds good.. Therefo ore, the e workin ng com mmittee can pro oceed with w the e collectiion of data d on all poin nts inclluding c clause 3(e), 3 butt they sh hall nott implem ment th he princ ciple off 'own merit' m in n view of unde ertaking g given n by th he learrned Solicitor S r Genera al before e the Su upreme Court.
***** **** ***** **** ****
69. Itt was submittted tha at the applicants have h no o cause o of actio on as the resp pondentts are o only colllecting g data fo for the implem mentatio on of the t ord der date ed 28thh Januarry, 2022 of th he Suprreme Co ourt. No order r is yett passed d by whiich applicants can be said to o be agg grieved.. We do not find d any force f in n this su ubmissiion. The ey have e framed f d the policy p w which iis agaiinst the e under rtaking g given b by the learne ed Soliicitor General G l in Supreme e Court.
70. In n view of the above, the priinciple of 'own n meritt' cannott be app plied in n view o of the underta u aking given g by y the lea arned So olicitor r Genera al in Su upreme Court. Clause e
(a) of th he offic ce order r dated 2nd Jun ne, 202 23 is sett aside.. Respon ndents by b claus se 3(d) have already instruc cted the e workin ng comm mittee that t the e reserv ved cate egory officials of s who ha ave nott subm mitted c caste va alidity certific cate as s manda ated by Mahara ashtra Caste Certific C cate Actt, 2001 1 will no ot be considere ed for p promotio on from m their currentt designa ation keeping k in vie ew the matterr of the e Chieff Regiona al Offic cer, Oriiental IInsuran nce Com mpany Limited L d versus Pradip p and Another, A r,(2020) 11 SC CC 144 in C.A..
No. 7422 of 202
20. The erefore, no dire ections in this regard d need to o be give en. The e respon ndents can c gra ant rese ervation n in prom motion only after a c collectin ng quan ntifiablle data a withou ut affectting effficiency y in ad dministrration as a held d in the case off M. Na agraj (s supra). OA is p partly allowed a d with no o order rs as to o cost. Pendin ng MAs, if any y, stand d closed."
(emp phasis su upplied)) 22 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 6.1 From the ab bove, it is no oticed that iin resp pect to o challe enge tto clau use 3 of the e impu ugned order dated d 12.6.2023, the Ho on'ble Member (Jud dicial) in his s orderr dated d 26.6.2 2024 mainly m r recorde ed its conclusion tha at:
(i) he und th dertakiing giv ven by y learn ned So olicitorr G General still hold h goo od and for that reas son, no o fu urther promo otion tto the reserv ved ca ategory y persons to unrreserve ed post will be e made e based d on n DoP&T OM M dated d 10.8 8.2010 and Railway R y B Board circularr dated 14.9.2 2010.
(ii) in n OM dated 12.4.20 022, nowhere n e it is stated d th hat the e princiiple of 'own merit' m b be cons sidered d fo or prom motion. There efore, do d not ffind an nything g w wrong in i clau use 3(b
b) of th he imp pugned d orderr dated 12 2.6.202 23. Ho owever, furthe er it has h been helld thatt principle e of 'ow wn merrit' as mention m ned in clause e 3(e) of th he impu ugned order, the sam me can nnot be e mpleme im ented in i view w of un ndertak king giv ven by y th he lea arned Solicittor Ge eneral beforre the e H Hon'ble Supreme Cou urt, wh hich sttill hold d good..
A Accordin ngly, it i has been directted that the e w working g comm mittee can procee ed witth the e co ollectio on of da ata on all poin nts inclluding clause e 3(e), butt they shall s not impllement the prrinciple e off 'own merit'.
m
(iii) in n para a 70, it has s been n held that "...the e p principle e of 'o own me erit' ca annot b be app plied in n view off the underttaking given by learned l d S Solicitorr Generral beffore th he Hon'ble Su upreme e C Court."
23 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Fu urther it i has b been held h tha at "Cla ause (a)) off para 3 of the off ffice ord der da ated 2nd June e 2 2023 is set asiide....".
N Note: It appe ears th hat the ere mig ght be e some e ty ypograp phical error in pa ara 70 of th he said d O Order in i resp pect to o men ntioning g of date d off im mpugne ed ord der as 2nd Ju une 20 023, but the e sa ame sh hould be b 12th June, 2023.
2(iv) W With the aforesa aid observa o ations and d fiindings s, the e Hon''ble Member M r (J) partly y allowed d the OA.
O
7. On rec ceipt of o afore esaid o order authore a ed by Hon'ble H e ber Memb (J Judicia al), altthough h the Hon'b ble M Member r (Admiinistrattive) had con ncurred d with the fiinding of the e Hon'b ble Mem mber (Judici ( al) tha at Artic cle 16((4) read d with h Article 16(4--A) of the Con nstitution, pro ovide fo or reserrvation n in prromotio on for the Sc chedule ed Cas stes an nd Sch heduled d Tribes s mand dates that t su uch res servatio ons be implem mented d in the e servic ces of the t Un nion an nd States, inc cluding in the e present cas se and d thus s, the Sche eduled Castes and d Sched duled T Tribes are a enttitled to vation in prom o reserv motion n in accorda a ance with w t the prrevailin ng Departme ent off Perso onnel a and Training T g (DoP P&T) Office O Memo oranda,, howe ever, w while renderi r ing a separa ate Orrder, Hon'ble H e Memb ber (Ad dministtrative) has ex xpresse ed his disagre eementt on certain n asp pects/fiindings s of ble Hon'b M Member r (Judic cial)and d main nly held d that:
(i) As perr the scheme s e of Co onstituttion off India, more e particu ularly Article A 16 (4-A A) and d Article e 16 (4 4-B) as s well as s vario ous jud dgmentts pass sed by y the Hon'ble H e Apex C Court such s as s R.K. Sabha arwal & Oth hers v..
State of Pun njab & Otherrs, (19
995) 2 SCC 745;
7 M..
Nagarraj & Others s v. Un nion of India a & Others, O , 24 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) (2006)) 8 SCC C 212;; and Jarna ail Sing gh & Others O s v. Lac cchmi Narain n Guptta and d otherrs (202
22) 10 0 SCC 5 595 (hereinaftter referrred to as 'Ja arnail Singh-- II), th he prin nciple of o rese ervation n in p promottion is s able in the case of SC/ST employ applica e ees.
(ii) Decline e to ag gree to the plleading gs to th he app plicants s that th here is no n rese ervation n in pro omotio on.
(iii) Furthe er by referrin e law laid d ng the down by b the e Hon'ble Apex x Courtt in the e case of R.K K. Sabh harwall (supra)), M. Nagara N aj (sup pra), Ja arnail Singh h-I and d II (sup pra) as a welll otherr judg gments and orders s passed d by the t varrious Hon'ble e High h Courrt and d Tribun nals in ncludin ng the orderr passed by CAT,, Mumbai Ben n OA 638/2017 decide nch in ed on n 05.06..2024 and OA O No o.332/ /2019 decided on n ng has been record 05.06..2024, findin ded tha at 'the e 'open c categorry' is op pen to a all and the on nly conditions s for a candidate to t be shown n in iit is 'merit',, regardlless off wheth her res servatio on benefits off otherr type w was ava ailable to him m or not.
n Th he conc cept off 'own m merit' lays l do own th hat when a p percenttage off reserva ation is fixed d in re espect to parrticularr cadre e and ro oster in ndicate es rese erve po oints, it has to be e taken that th wn at the res he postts show served points s mongst the members are to be fillled am m s of re eserved d categorry and d the candida c ates be elongin ng to general g l categorry are not enttitled fo or the reserve e post and a on n the oth her ha and res serve ca andida ate can n comp pete forr non-re eserve post and in th he eve ent of theirr appoin ntment on th heir "ow wn me erit", ttheir number n r cannott be ad dded and a tak ken intto cons sideratiion forr workin ng out the t perrcentag ge of res servatio on.
25 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) F Further it has s been held that th he app plicants s have m misund d that the op derstood pen cattegory means s higher class catego ory and d reserrve cattegory means s lower c class categor c ry. In llaw, op pen cattegory means s the cattegory in i whic ch recru uitmen nt is ma ade purely on n merit b basis.'
(iv) Furthe er it ha as been n held tthat it would suffice e if the e post-ba ased ro oster is s prepa ared and main ntained d in the e manne er of fillling up of th he postts as p prescrib bed by y the C Constittutiona al Ben nch decision d n in R.K.. Sabha arwal (supra) ( ), the d data be enchma ark wo ould be e met as s no fu urther require r ment is necessary if i post--
based roster is main ntained d as laiid down n in pa ara 121 of M. Naga araj (su upra) and paras p 17-18 of the 1 e judgme j ent pas ssed by y Hon'b ble Ape ex Court in Jarnail J l Singh vs. Lacchm L mi Narrain Gupta, G reporrted in n (2022) 10 SCC 595,
(v) er, 'cadre' has Furthe s been h held as s a unitt, there efore, a cadre's s data is alw ways iin the posse ession of the e appoin nting au uthoritty or ca adre co ontrolliing autthority,, therefo ore, th here is s no furthe er requ uireme ent as s Appoin nting Authorit A ty has the re equisite e autho ority to o apply the po ost-bas sed ros ster an nd had d the data d off inadeq quacy of th he re epresen ntation of SC/ST T employ yees in a partticular cadre and a tak ke decision to o provide e for adequat a te reprresentation to o them in the e said ca adre.
(vi) Furthe er the respon ndents can grant g re eservattion in n promottion, iff they are a maintainin ng postt-based d rosterr as stip pulated d by the t Ho on'ble Suprem me Co ourt in n Jarna gh vs. Lacchmi Nar ail Sing rain G Gupta, (2022)) 10 SC CC 59
95. Th he clarrificatio ons an nd dire ections s 26 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) issued by the e Hon'b ble Ape ex Courrt in Ja arnail Singh h II (sup pra) are requirred to b be follow wed.
(vii) The a applican s no cause of ac nt has ction as a the e respon ndents are y only colllecting data a forr implem mentatiion of the t ord der date ed 28.1 1.2022 of the e Hon'ble Suprreme Co ourt in n Jarna ail Sin ngh-II (s supra).. As such, no o orderr is y yet pas ssed by y whic ch the e applica ants can c be e said d to be b agg grieved d. The e respon ndents can grrant re eservatiion in promo otion iff they arre main ntainin ng post--based roster as stip pulated d in the Hon'ble e Supreme Co ourt.
(viii) As laid d down n in R..K. Sab bharw wal (sup pra), th here is s no barr in law w for the ca andidates belo onging to SC C and ST T to eitther co ompete in ope en competition n or to o compete in re eserved d catego ory. Th he appliicants cannot c t have a any griievance e by a any pro omotion n gran nted to o such categorry of employ yee(s) in op pen ca ategory.. Becaus se therre is no rightt of pro omotion n but merely y right to o be co onsiderred for promotion an nd the SC/ST T employ ave a right tto be conside yees ha c ered in n open n categorry as well w as a reserrved cattegory.
In n law, open categorry mea ans the e categ gory in n which recruitment is mad de purrely on merit basis.. Hence,, do not n agree wiith the e plead dings of the e applica ants in this re egard.'
(ix) The H Hon'ble Memb ber (A)) did not fin nd any y legall infirmiities in n claus se 3(e)) of th he imp pugned orderr which speak ks ab bout e examin nation of re eserved d categorry cand didates have passed departm s who h mentall examin nation on ge eneral standard forr implem mentatiion of "own " merit" as per e m extent OMs O off DoP&T T and in nterim directiions of Hon'blle Apex x Courtt dated 28.1.2002 in n Jarn nail Singh-II case (supra) ( ) 27 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) and p publicattion off list o of suc ch candidates s afterr consideration n of the e representatiion, if a any, with w the e val of the approv t com mpeten nt auth hority a and th he finall decisio on in re espect of 'own n meritt' shalll be tak ken by y DPC. A As the said Office O Order dated 12.6.2 2023 is s purely an adm ministrrative o order and a no final order off grant o of prom een issued. A motion has be Accordin ngly, itt has be een held d that no righ ht of th he appllicants stated d to be in nfringe ed.
(x) With tthe afo oresaid observ vations and ffinding gs, the e Hon'blle Mem mber (A A) dism missed the saiid OA.
8. Since differen nt observatio ons and d findings re ecorded d by both b H Hon'ble e Mem mbers while decidiing th he OA A No.55 57/202 23 by their t se eparate e orders, thus s, the 'points ' s of diffferenc ces/dis sagreem ment' has be een rec corded by the e Hon'b ble Mem mber (A A) and the sa ame is under referen nce forr consideratio on and adjudiication for the e Third Memb ber.
Therefo ore, it is app propria ate to reproduce th he said d 'poin nts of differrence/d disagre eement' whiich rea ads as s underr:
"1. I have had the t op pportun nity to o peruse the e opinion n/judgm ment pronoun p nced by y Shri Justic ce M.G..
Sewlik ker, Me ember (Judicia (J al), and d I con ncur wiith the e finding f g that Article A e 16(4) rread with w Artticle 16 6(4A) off the Co onstitu ution, as a inse erted by b the Consttitution n (Seventy-Seve enth Am mendm ment) Ac ct, 1995 5, prov vide for r reserva ation in i prom motion for the Sche eduled Castes s and S Scheduled Tr ribes w with retrospe r ective effect..
This a applies s notwiithstan nding the t Su upreme Courtt judgme j ent in Indra Sawhn ney and d Otherrs v. Un nion off India, (1992)) Suppll. 3 SC CC227, and m mandate es thatt b implemente such rreservations be ed in th he serv vices off the Un nion an nd Sta ates, in ncluding g the p present case.. The S Schedulled Cas stes and Sch d Trib heduled bes are e thus entitle ed to reserv vation in p promotiion in n 28 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) accord dance with the p prevailing De epartme ent off Person nnel an nd Train ning (D DoPT) Offfice M Memoran nda.
Howev ver, with respe ect, I ex xpresse ed my d disagre eementt with c certain aspectts of th he opin nion off Shri Justice J e M.G. S Sewlike er, Mem mber (J Judicia al), spe ecificallly the e followi f ing:
(A) W While both b of us agree that the rig ght to o reserva ation in i prom motion,, as pe er Artic cle 16((4) and d the Seventy-S Seventh h Amen ndmentt introd ducing Article e 16(4 A A) of the t Co onstituttion, is i avaiilable to the e Schedu uled Ca astes and a Sch heduled d Tribe es (SC/S ST), we e disagrree on the iss sue off wheth her members of the e Schedu uled Ca astes and a Sch heduled d Tribes are entitled e d to be c conside ered in n the g generall categ gory ba ased on n open m merit.
I hold that t s of the Sche members eduled Castes s and S Schedulled Tr ribes a are enttitled tto promotion n based on the eir own n meritt, and that t th he righ ht to be e consid dered on o mer rit doe es nott overllap with the e reserva ation in i prom motion provid ded by Article es16(4)) and 1 16(4A) of the e Cons stitutio on. Wh hen gr ranting g reserva ation in n prom motion tto SC/S STs, the e princ ciple off own-m merit se election n appllies, as a held d by various v s Constitution Bench jud dgments s of the H Hon'ble e Suprem me Cou urt, inc cluding g V.V. Giri G v. D D. Susii Dora,, (1960) 1 SCR 426; Indra In S Sawhne ey & Otthers v.. Union n of India & Others, O , (1992
2) Supp p. 3 SC CC 217 7; R.K..
Sabha arwal & Othe ers v. S State of Punja ab & Others, O , (1995) 2SCC 745; M. M Naga araj & Otherrs v. Un nion off India & Oth hers,(20
006) 8 SCC 212; and Jarnail J l Singh & Oth hers v. Union of Ind dia & O Others,, (2018 8 INSC 8 881 an nd 2022 2 INSC C 10S). These Consttitution n Bench judgm ments off the Su upreme e, Courrt estab blished d that S SC/ST candid dates s selected on merit in the e genera al cattegory canno ot be adjus sted a against t reserve ed cate egory vacanciies if se elected d on the eir own n merit.
L Learned d Memb ber (Ju udicial),, while e consiidering g the ab bove le egal po osition,, has additionally relied d upon the underta u aking made by tthe So olicitor r Genera al befo ore th he Sup preme Court -thoug gh nott 29 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) found f in an ny Sup preme Courtt order. Thiis was s referen nced in the Deparrtment of Pe ersonne el and d Training (DoPT) O Office Memo orandum (OM M) No..
36012/
2/11/20
016-Est..(Res.) dated
d 30th
h September
r
2016. In this s OM, th he DoP PT repro oduces s the So olicitor r Genera al's und dertak king tha at "unttil the main matter r along with the t Co ontempt Petittion is decid ded, no o further f r prom motions of res served categor c ry pers sons to o unrese erved posts p w will be made based on the e DoPT T ated 10.8.2010and Railw OM da way Bo oard ciircular r dated 14.9.2 2010," and a the erefore e, he co onclude ed thatt the ow wn me erit pro omotio on for SC/ST Ts cann not be e implem mented in viiew off the Solicittor Ge eneral's s underttaking..
While disagr reeing with w le earned Membe er (Judiicial), I have ttaken into i ac ccount the Su upreme e Courtt order r dated 17.05..2018 in Jarrnail Siingh (S Speciall Leave e Petitio on No. 3062 21 of 2011, Civil Appea al No..
629/20022), re elied upon u by y the Respond R dents. In this s order, the Supre eme Co ourt directe d ed tha at the e penden ncy of the Sp pecial L Leave Petitio on shou uld nott preven nt the Union of Ind dia fro om proceeding g with h promotions based d on "reser rved tto res served,""
"unreserved to un nreserve ed," and a prromotio ons on n merit. This order, is ssued s subsequ uent to o the So olicitor r Genera al's underta u aking overriiding the earlier r contex xt, effec ctively nullifi fies tha at unde ertakin ng. The e Suprem me Cou urt ord der of 1 17.05.2 2018su upersed des the e Solicittor Ge eneral's s earliier pos sition, which h was s contra ary to the law, an nd aliigns w with th he law w declarred by y the Suprreme Court in v various s Constitution Bench h judgm ments referenc r ced ab bove. In n any ev vent, th he law declarred by the Su upreme e Courtt prevails over r any such u underta aking made by the e govern nment or o thro ough th he Solic citor G Generall / Law w Officerrs to th he Sup preme C Court or o any other Court,, regard dless of co omplia ance. Also, consiidering g promotion on n own merit iis aright that arise es from m Article e 16(1)) of the t Co onstituttion a and he ence a Funda amentall Rightt.
(B) T urther disagrreemen That fu nt aros se reg garding g the co ollectio on of quantif q fiable data for gr ranting g 30 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) reserva ation in i prom motion by ena abling Article e l6(4A)) of the Constittution.
I have conside c ered th he legall positiion settled by y the Su upreme e Courtt in In ndra Sa awhney y v. Un nion off India, 1992 Supp (3) SCC C 217; R.K. S Sabhar rwal v..
State of Pun njab, (1 1995) 2 SCC 745; M M. Nagaraj v.. Union of India, (2006) 8 S SCC 21 12; Jarrnail Siingh v.. Lachhm mi Nar rayan Gupta G (Jarna ail Sing gh - I), (2018)) 10 SC CC 396;;and Jarnail J Singh h v. Un nion off India a (Jarna ail Sing gh - II), 2022 S SCC On nLine S SC 96, etc., e to o conclu ude tha at qua antifiab ble da ata con ncernin ng the e inadeq quacy of o repr resenta ation of Sche eduled Castes s and S Schedu uled T Tribes is req quired to p provide e reserva ation to t SC/S STs, inc cluding g in pro omotion n. This s data, howev ver, mu ust pe ertain specifiically to the e inadeq quacy of o repr resenta ation within w tthe cad dres off the Sta ate or Union service s es. As held h by y the Su upreme e Court, the ro oster must m be e main ntained d within n each h cadre of the service s es of th he State e or Un nion, an nd it is s the in nadequ uacy o of SC//ST rep presen ntation in a particu ular ca adre th hat ena ables/a authoriz zes the e State e to implementt reserv vation iin prom motion ffor SC//STs.
W While le earned d Memb dicial), has directed ber (Jud d the colllection n f datta beforre enab bling A Article 16(4), I hold tthat the t ina adequa acy off repre esentattion off SC/STs s in a particu p ular ca adre ro oster is s suffic cient to o enable e Articlle 16(4A 4A) of tthe Con nstitutiion, an nd thatt the ro roster mainta ained by th he de epartme ent is s adequa ate to t demonstrrate such inade equacy..
Conseq quently y, fur rther collecttion o of datta on n inadeq quacy of o repr resenta ation is s not in n accordance e with tthe law w. The erefore,, I con nclude e that if the e roster has already been m mainta ained o or existts with h respec ct to th he cadr re of th he serv vices off the State or r Union and demon nstrate es inad dequac cy in SC/ST T represe on, no addittional data collecttion is entatio s require ed by the State S ((under Article 12 of the e Constitution).
Therefore, Le T earned Memb ber (Ju udicial)), Shrii Justice e M.G.S Sewlikar, pa artly alllowed the Original O l 31 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Application, where eas, I dismiissed iit. Hen nce, a disagrreementt has arisen a iin this matterr.
2. T The Reg gistry shall s pllace th his mattter befo fore the e Hon'ble e Chaiirman of the e Centtral Ad dminis strative e Tribun nal, New w Delhii, for ap appropr riate orrders."
9. On rec ceipt of o aforresaid points of differenc ces, by y wing th follow he prin nciples of nattural justice, the learned d couns sel for the pa arties were w giv ven opp portuniity to address a s their argum ments on n 'pointts of diifferenc ces'.
10. I have e hearrd Shrri Tus shar Mandle M kar, learned d sel forr the applica couns a ants, S Shri B.D. Pan ndit, learned d couns sel forr the officiall respo ondents, i.e.,, respo ondentt nos.1 1 to 4 a and Sh hri S.J.. Kamle e and Shri M M.M. Su udame,, learned cou unsel fo or priva ate resp ponden nts on the afo oresaid d nts of d "poin differe ences" and pe erused the ma aterial placed d on record.
ed cou
11. Learne unsel for e applicants Shri Tushar fo the T r Mand dlekar by sup pportin ng the view of o Hon n'ble Member M r (Judicial) re eiterated d his submiss sions th hat:
(i) B Being aggrieve a ed by paras 3(b) to o 3(e) of the e O Office Order O d dated 12.6.2023 is ssued by b the e Joint Commi C ssionerr of Income e Tax x (HQ)) Admn.) O/o th (A he Prin ncipal Chief C C Commis ssionerr off Incom me Tax x, all the ap pplicants hav ve filed d re epresen ntation n collec ctively dated d 16.6.202 23/20..6.2023 3 (Ann nexure P/26 refer)) before the t Prrincipall Chief Com mmissio oner off In ncome Tax th hrough h prope er chan nnel but b the e sa ame have h no ot been n decid ded as s yet, hence,, approac ched th his Tribu unal fo or prote ection of o theirr fu undamental right and theirr resp pective e se eniority y as th he resp ponden nts hav ve startted the e 32 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) illegal process p s of 'rreview DPC' which is in n viiolation n of setttled law w.
(ii) T The prin nciple of o 'own n meritt' as en numera ated by y th he Dep pot in their va arious office o M Memora andum m su uch as s OMs dated d 11.07 7.2002, 31.01.2005 5 and 10.0 10, the said OMs are 08.201 e overru uled by y th he Hon n'ble Pu unjab a and Harryana H High Co ourt in n L Lacchm mi Nara ain Gu upta vs s. Jarn nail Singh in n C CWP NO O.13218 of 20 009 de ecided o on 15.7 7.2011 (A Annexu ure P P/09 refer). The erefore,, the e im mpugne ed orde er date ed 12.6 6.2023 is viola ative off th he judg gment deliverred by y Hon'b ble Pun njab & H Haryana a High h Courrt as well a as jud dgmentt passed by the e Hon'b ble Sup preme Court in the e ase of Jarna ca ail Sin ngh vs s. Lacc chmi Narain N n G Gupta reportted in n (202
22) 10 0 SCC C 595 5 (A Annexu ure P/1 18 referr).
(iii) A Accordin ng to the llearned d coun nsel fo or the e applican nts, th here is no ru ule, reg gulation n, law,, n notificattion, empowe e ering the t res sponde ents to o im mpleme ent th he prin nciple of 'ow wn merrit'. In n absence e of any y of the ese, prin nciple of 'own n merit'' ca annot be im mplemen nted. Hence, H there is no o qu uestion n to aga ain bring thes se dead d OMs for the e purpose e of gra anting reserv vation in prom motion n to o the 'reserved d categ gory' pe ersons.
(iv) T The imp pugned d order is viollative o of the interim i m orrder pa assed by b the H Hon'ble e Supre eme Co ourt on n 17.05.20 018 in n SLP (Civil) No.30621 off 2011 J Jarnaill Sing gh vs. Lacch hmi Na arain Gupta a (A ure P/13 reffer) wh Annexu herein it has s been n directed ndency of the SLP sh d that the pen hall nott sttand in n the way w of U Union of o India a taking g steps s fo or the purpos p se of prromotio on from m 'reserrved to o 33 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) re eserved d cattegory' and 'unrreserve ed to o u unreserv ved cattegory' and also a in the ma atter off promotion on merit.
m
(v) L Learned d couns sel for tthe app plicants s addittionally y placed reliance r e on orrder pa assed by y CAT Jaipurr B Bench in OA No.421 N /2014 dated 16.2.2 2024 in n su upport of the e subm mission ns thatt princ ciple off 'o own merit' ha as to be con nsidered for limited l d purpose e, i.e., only at th he lev vel of initiall re ecruitm ment an nd nott in prromotio on. In n otherr w words, learne ed cou unsel would argue e thatt S SC/ST employ yees on nce rec cruited d again nst the e re eserved d categ gory can nnot be e allow wed to change c e th heir ca ategory at the level of o prom motion on the e basis off their 'own merit'.. Furth her he relied d u upon th he orde er passed by y the H Hon'ble e High h C Court of judica ature ffor Raja asthan n at Jaiipur in n C Civil Writ W P Petition n no.5 5558/2 2023 Abdull R Rashid vs. Un nion off India a and others s dated d 4.4.2024 4 and reitera ated th he sub bmissio on thatt siince un ndertak king ha as been n given n on be ehalf off U Union of o India a beforre the Hon'ble H e Apex x Courtt th hat no further prom motion to t reserrved ca ategory y persons to unreser u rved po ost wiill be made,, th hereforre, the action n of the res sponden nts as s in ndicate ed in th he impu ugned order o is s illegall.
(vi) L Learned d couns sel for the ap pplican nts reitterated d th he sub bmissio ons as s recorded b by botth the e m memberrs in orders o as well as th a he judg gments s re elied up pon by y him.
12. On the e other hand, Shri B Bhaskerr D. Pa andit, learned d sel for the offficial re couns espond dents while w su upportiing the e view express e sed by Hon'blle Mem mber (Ad dministtrative)) in the e 34 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) orderr passe ed in OA No o.557/2023, mainly y argu ued as s underr:-
(i) T The imp pugned d orderr dated d 12.6 6.2023, is an n offfice orrder of formin ng of a workin ng com mmittee e fo or veriification n and prepa aring o of deta ails forr co onductting the e review w DPC since 1997 tiill date e n Group 'B' and 'C' cadres. The w in work sc cope off he worrking commiittee and SO th OP has s been n m ned in para 3 of th mention he imp pugned d orderr w wherein n it has been c categorrically s stated in i para a 3 (a) tha at the said s Co ommittee is en ntruste ed with h th he worrk of ex xaminin ng the directtions giiven in n C CBDT letter dated d 27.0 05.2019 reg garding g prospective im mplemen ntation n of jud dgmentt of the e H Hon'ble Supre eme Co ourt in Union n of In ndia & O Ors. v. N.R. Parma P ar & Ors.
O 20 012 (13
3) SCC C 3 340 an nd als so exa amining g the instru uctions s is ssued vide OM O dated 13.8.20 1 021 in n Civill A Appeal No.8833-88 835 of o 20 019 o of K..
M Meghac chandr ra Singh and a a anothe er vs..
N
Ningam
m Siro
o and
d oth
hers for efffective
e
im
mpleme
entation of said
d dire
ections and
d
in
nstructtions in n the N Nagpur region by rev viewing g D DPCs siince R..Y. 199 97 to th he DPC C till date, as s also issu ued ce ertain o other direction d ns in respect r t to o the scope s of said d work king co ommitte ee and d S SOP in that regard.
r The commit
c ttee wa
as also
o
en
ntruste
ed with
h the respon nsibility y to co onsiderr th he reprresenta ation, iff any, with w th he apprroval off th he com mpetent authorrity.
It is furtther su ubmitte ed that by fo orming g th he worrking commit c ttee vid de impugned order,, th he dep partment is intend ding to o rectiify the e om mission n, fa actual misttakes, proc cedurall 35 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) irrregularities and a to assist in colle ection of o data a and the e Comm mittee w will su ubmit itts repo ort and d fiindings s to the D Departtmentall Prom motion n C Committtee in n the light of o the instru uctions s co ontaine ed in DoP& &T OM dated d 13.4 4.1998.
H Hence, the t working c committtee is not actting as s D DPC.
(ii) T The OA A is pre ematurre whic ch can n be re evealed d frrom pa ara 6 of o the OA as there is a specific s c m mention n abo out tthe pendenc p cy off the e re epresen ntation ns be efore the respon ndents.
Thereforre, the filing of the presen T nt OA by the e applican nts is not in co onsona ance o of the e provisions of Section S n 20 (2)(b) of the A.T. Act,, 1985 an nd on this t cou unt, th he OA iis liable e to be e ejected. re
(iii) Itt is an admitted position th hat unlless an nd untill th here is s an outcome o e of DPC D an nd prom motion n pursuan nt to itt, no c cause of o actio on accrrues to o he aggrrieved person th p (s). As on datte, therre is no o decision n of DPC C.
(iv) F he prayer soug From th ght in para p 8 (v) of the OA,, itt can be gatthered that the ap pplican nts are e se eeking prote ection given to tthem as IT T In nspecto or in 2022 2 a along with w heir in th nter se e se eniority y. As th he said d seniorrity had d been issued d as per the t pre evailing g law an nd jud dgments s, bearr re eading of said d praye er clau use ind dicates that itt is s a se eparate e caus se of action n having no o co onnection witth pray yers so ought iin para as 8 (i)) to o (iv).
(v) L Learned d counsel forr the official o respon ndents s w would argue that the entire e argu uments s 36 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) advance ed on behalf b of the applica ants were w on n th he line as if any a fin nding of o DPC is arriived att and cerrtain orders o are pa assed iin resp pect off promotions in pursu uance to t it w with reg gard to o re eservattion. In n fact, the prresent OA has been n fiiled by the ap pplicantts and the prrayers soughtt are like e of the t na ature of Pu ublic In nterestt L Litigatio on (PIL L) whiich is not mainta ainable e before th his Trib bunal.
(vi) Itt is sub bmitted d that d during the pen ndency y of the e ca ase of Jarna ail Sin ngh vs s. Lacc chmi Narain N n G Gupta and others, o the Hon'ble H e Apex Courtt viide inte erim orrder da ated 17.05.2018 (Ann nexure e P P/13 page p 1 191 refer) directe d d tha at 'the e pendenc cy of this t SL LP shalll not stand in the e w way of Union n of In ndia ta aking s steps for f the e purpose e of prromotio on 'res served to reserved'' and 'unreserve ed to u unreserv ved' an nd also in the e m matter of o prom motion ''on me erits'.
Fu urther, in on ne of the t connecte ed SLP P N No.2830 06/201 sing out of jud 17 (aris dgmentt dated d 4.8.2017 WP NO.2797/ 7 in CW /2015 p passed by the e H High Court of o Judiicature e at B Bombay y) with h pending g case of Jarnail Singh (supra
a) and d otthers, the Hon'ble H Apex Court vide orderr dated 5.6.201 5 8 mad de it clear c th hat Un nion off ndia is not debarred In d from m makin ng prom motion n in n acco ordance e with law, subjec ct to further f r orrders, pendin ng furtther co onsiderration of the e m matter (Anne exure P/14 page 193 refer)..
T uctions issued
Thereforre, the instru d vide Depot's
D s
OM datted 30.09.2016 (An O nnexure e P/12 2 page e 189 refe er) is as s such merged d in the subsequentt in ed by the H nterim order passe Hon'ble e Apex x 37 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) C Court. Thus, T i is no it ot open n for th he app plicants s to o plea ad thatt as p per th he said d OM dated d 30.09.20 016, the DoP&T T res stricted d the e G Governm ment Departm D ment no ot to co onsiderr cases s off prom motion includin i ng the cases of own n meritt ca ases. In othe er word ds, learrned co ounsel would d argue th hat the ere is n no bar for tak king ste eps forr th he purp pose off promo otion in n the lig ght of interim i m direction ns issu ued by the Ho on'ble A Apex Co ourt in n J Jarnaill Singh h's case e (suprra).
(vii) L Learned d counsel forr the official o respon ndents s ubmitted thatt the fiindings su s recorrded in n paras s 35 and 38 by y the H Hon'ble Memb ber (A) are in n co onsona ance with w th he clariification ns/dire ections s is ssued by b the Hon'ble Apex x Courrt in Jarnail J l S Singh-II's cas se (sup pra) in ncludin ng the orderr passed by the Hon'b ble Ape ex Courrt in Jarnail J l S Singh II I case.
(viii) In n sum and su ubstanc ce, learrned co ounsel for the e offficial respond r dents w would argue a tthat the e orderr re endered d by the Ho on'ble Memb ber (A) is in n co onsona ance with w th he law laid d down by b the e H Hon'ble Apex Court C iin R.K.. Sabh harwal's case e (s supra) as we ell as jjudgme ents pa assed by b the e H Hon'ble Suprreme Court with rega ard to o applicab bility off princiiple of 'own m merit' and a the e sa ame is s also passed p ht of tthe dire in ligh ections s is on'ble Apex Court in Jarnail ssued by Ho J l S I case (supra)). Singh II
13. Learne ed coun nsel Sh hri M.M M. Sud dame w with Sh hri S.J. Kamle appe earing for prrivate respon ndents (interv veners)) subm he OA is mis mitted tthat th sconceiived siince no o rightt 38 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) whats soever of the e applic cants h has be een inffringed as on n date.
13.1 Furtther it is subm mitted that th he polic cy deciision off the official o ndents to con respon nstitute e the C Commiittee to o collec ct the n necessa ary deta ails/da ata with h regarrd to mandate e of jud dgmentt in the e case of N.R R. Parm mar (supra) and a K..
Megh hachan ndra (s supra),, the s said offfice ord der, wh hich is s impugned iin the prese ent OA A, is as a such pure ely an n nistratiive ord admin der and d this T Tribuna al shou uld refr frain to o interffere with as the sa ame is within n the a adminis strative e doma ain of th he offic cial resp ponden nts.
13.2 It is conten nded th hat the applic cants h have no o cause e of ac ction. T They have h prreferred d application n again nst the e Office e Orderr dated d 12th June, J 2 2023 which w is s passe ed with h the ap pprova al of the e competent a authoritty.
13.3 The impugned Offfice Orrder merely m a direction to o consttitute a Workiing Com mmitte ee of ten Offic cers an nd Stafff of th he Inco ome Ta ax Dep partmen nt, Na agpur a and en ntrusts s them the wo ork of prepari p ing dettails forr condu ucting Review w DPC in i the llight off instru uctions contaiined in para no.3.(a) n ) to 3.(e) of th he impu ugned order o d dated 12 2.6.202 23. Therrefore, the ap pplican nts can nnot be e said to be e eved b aggrie by an action a of the Incom me Tax x Departmentt study ying im mplicattion off N. R R. Par rmar's decisiion orr Megh hachan ndra Singh's S decisio on of Apex Co ourt (su upra).
Furth her it is s subm mitted tthat th he comm mittee has to o collec ct gene eral sttandard ementation of 'own ds for imple n meritt' in p promotion as s per DoP&T T OM dated d 28th h January, 2022. The T Co ommitttee is require ed to rectify y sions, ffactual exercis omiss se and proced dure.
39 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) This cleriical wo ork to o be carried c out by b the e respo ondents s canno ot give rise to any ca ause off action n to the e applic cants.
If th he applicants s are p permitte ed to c challen nge the e forma ation of the commit c ttee or work of o the commiittee, itt would d amou unt to day-to-day in nterfere ence in n the work w off deparrtment.
This s Tribu unal has no ju urisdicttion to interfe ere into o affairs of the department. No lega day-to-day a al rightt of the e applic cants can be e said to ha ave bee en violated by b the e respo ondents s.
13.4 It is s subm mitted th hat applicantts have e no ca ause off action n as th hey are e alread dy prom moted and arre work king att their respec ctive post p on n subs stantive e basis s. No formall orderr is yet passed d from which w the app plicantts can be b said d to be aggriev ved.
13.5 It is submiitted th hat Rev view DP PCs we ere conducted d in the e montth of March M 2 2020 a as per the t dirrections s given n by th his Trib bunal in its Orderr dated d 30th h Nove ember,, 2018 A No. 2181/ 8 in OA /2013 (Sham ma Ana ant Va akil & Others Vers sus Un nion off India)).
13.6 The respon ndents have c constitu uted th he Com mmittee e for co ollection n of da ata of reserved d categ gory can ndidate es who o have passe ed dep partme ental examin nation on g general l stand or impllementation o dards fo of 'own merit' in prom motion n as pe er extan nt OMs s of De epot an nd in co onsona ance with the e interiim dire ections of Sup preme C Court in n Jarn nail Singh & Ors vs. L Lacchm mi Na arain Gupta a & Ors. dated d 28thJanuar J ry, 202 22. 13.7 So far arrgumen nt adv vanced on b behalf of the e applic cants tthat th here is no pro ovision of law w to allo ow the e respo ondents s to apply a p principl le of 'own m merit' in the e 40 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) matte er of g grant of o prom motion n, learn ned co ounsel would d subm mit thatt the sa aid sub bmissio on is not n corrrect sin nce the e Hon'b ble Apex Cou urt in the c case of o Indrra Saw whney y (suprra), R.K K. Sabh harwal (suprra) as well w as iin the case c off Jarnail Sin ngh-I and a Ja arnail Singh h-II (supra)helld thatt the principl p eservatiion in promotion an le of re nd prom motion n on 'o own me erit' is s in co onsonan nce wiith ma andate underr Articlle 16 (4A) and a 16 6 (4B) of th he Con nstitutiion as s amen nded tilll date.
13.8 Further itt is s submit tted th hat th he jud dgmentt rende ered by y the Hon'ble Apex C Court in n Jarn nail Singh-II,, reporrted in n (2022
2) 10 SCC 5 595, ha as clariified th hat the e variou us issu ues to implem ment p principlle of reservattion in n promotion iin the light of o law laid do own by y the Hon'ble H e eme Co Supre ourt in n M. Nagaraj N aj (suprra) and d in terms off mand date un nder Article A 16 (4A A) of the t Co onstituttion off India.
13.9 It is su ubmittted thatt by refferring to the variou us OMs s issued by the Do oP&T and d dictum laid d down by b the e Hon'b ble Ape ex Courrt in va arious jjudgme ents on n the point p off grantt of reserrvation n in prom motion, inc cluding g consideratio on of 'o own me erit' cas ses, the e Principal Be ench off this Tribuna T al in th he case e of An nita R Saxen na vs. AIIMS S dated d 15th Decem mber, 2020, in n Kam mal Ku umar Raja R & Ajit Singh h vs. AIIMS A dated 14th October, 20 021, in n Sures sh Kum mar Bu v Union of India ukka vs I & Ors.. dated d 9th Februar F ry, 202 23 and in the case of o Shya am Ba ahadur r & Or rs, vs. Union of Ind dia & O Ors. da ated 24th May y, 2023 3 held that tthe priinciple of res servatio on in promottion is s cable in applic n accorrdance with la aw.
13.10 0 It is submiitted th hat the e conce ept of 'o own merit' m is s not illegal. It is not n vio olative of any y judge ement of the e Hon'b preme Court as alle ble Sup eged. In I this regard d, it is s 41 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) subm mitted that as per Do oP&T O OM datted 2ndJ July, 1997, itt is cllear th hat th he SC/ST c candida ates a appointted by y promotion o on theirr own merit m w will not be adju usted against a t eserved the re d points of the reserrvation roster. They will be e adjus sted on n unres served posts. If an unrese u erved va acancy y arises s in a cadre e and there is any y SC/S ST can ndidate e within n the norma al zone e of co onsidera ation iin the feederr grade e, suc ch SC C/ST candid date cannot c be denied d promotion o on the plea p th hat the post is s not re eserved d. Such h ndidate a can e will be b cons sidered d for promotion alongwith h otherr candid dates treating t g him a as if he e belon ngs to general g l categ gory. In n case he is selected s d, he will w be appoin nted to o the post p an nd willl be adjusted d again nst the e unre eserved d point.
13.11 1 Itt is fu urther stated d that SC/ST T cand didates s appoiinted o on the eir ow wn merrit and d adju usted against a t unres served points will re etain their sttatus o of SC/S ST and d will be b eligible to get ben nefit of reservation in futu ure forr furthe er prom motions s, if an ny. If th he prin nciple o of 'own n merit'' is nott applie ed and d the ge eneral candid dates' juniors to the e reserv ved ca ategory candid dates a are con nsidere ed and d given n promotion, then promoti p ion would be denied d to a seniorr ved reserv c category y can ndidate es wh ho fullfill alll the e qualiffication n pres scribed d for the general g cand didates. Denying pro omotion n to su uch can ndidate es would amo ount to o selecttive discrimin nation only ffor the e reaso on tha at they y belon ng to th he reserrved ca ategory..
13.12 2 Itt is sub bmitted d that tthe OM M dated d 10thAugust, A , 2010 has b been co onsidere ed by the Ho on'ble B Bombay y High h Courtt afterr notic cing th he jud dgemen nt of Punjab b and d Harya ana Hig gh Cou urt set aside tthe OM M dated d 10thAugust, A , 2010. They y conte end tha at sinc ce it is s the jjudgem ment off Bomb bay Hig gh Court, it ha as to b be follow wed in prefere ence to o the ju udgeme ent of Punjab P & Hary yana High H Co ourt.
42 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 13.13 3 It is s subm mitted that n now bo oth th he judg gments s rende y the said Hon'ble ered by H e High Courtts are underr challe enge be efore th he Hon n'ble Ap pex Co ourt. It is sub bmitted d that the jud dgment of Pu unjab and Haryana H a High Courtt has been b c challeng ged by y the rrespond dents b by pre eferring g SLP (C) ( No.. 6915/2014 (now registered as Civil Appeal A l 38 of 2022 an No.63 nd duriing the e pende ency off the sa aid SLP P and nected conn SLP Ps includin ng tthe SLP(C)) No.30 0621/2 2011 (n now reg gistered d as Civ vil App peal No.629 off 2022)), the H Hon'ble e Apex Court vide ju udgmen nt date ed 28thh January, 20 022 (Ja Jarnaill Singh h-II cas se) has s set out o the e condiitions tthat are e to be e satisfiied by the Go overnm ment forr the purpose p e of implemen nting th he poliicy of rreserva ation in n promotions.. These e condittions arre:
(i) C Collectio on of quan ntifiable datta reg garding g in nadequ uacy of reprresenta ation o of Sch heduled d C Castes and a Sch heduled Tribe es:
(ii) A
Applicattion o
of this
s data
a to each cadre
e
se
eparate
ely: and
d
(iii) Iff a rostter exis
sts, the
e unit for ope eration of the e ro oster would w be th he cad dre forr whic ch the e uantifiable data qu d wo ould have to be co ollected d and app plied in n regarrd to the filliing up of the e acancie va es in th he roste er.
Furth her in this re egard, it i is su ubmitte ed thatt by re eferring g the directio d ons iss sued by b the Hon'b ble Ap pex Co ourt in n Jarnail Sin ngh's-III case (supra
a), the DoP&T T issue ed OM M dated d 12.4.2 2022 and a ha ad issue ed variious in nstructiions in n respe ect to proced dure to o be fo ollowed d priorr to efffecting g reserv vation in the e mattter of promo otion a and ha ad also o decla ared th hat th he judg gment dated d 28.0 01.2022 2, i.e.,, Jarnail Sin ngh-II case c (su upra) c currenttly holds the field.
43 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 13.14 4 L Learned d coun nsel S Shri M.M. M Sudam me by y referrring th he afore esaid judgme ents arrgued tthat th he view w expre essed b by Hon n'ble Member M r (J) in n para 61 th hat the e imple ementa ation off 'own merit' m c cannott be im mplemen nted in n view of un ndertak king given g b by the e learn ned So olicitorr Generral an nd dire ected the t wo orking comm mittee not to o imple ement tthe prin nciple of n merit'', the same is not in o 'own n conso onance with the t law w laid d down by b the Hon'ble Apex x Courtt.
At the same time, he h argu ued tha at obse ervation ns and d ngs rec findin corded by the Hon'blle Mem mber (A A) in his s orderr are in n conso onance e with the t law w laid down d by y the Hon'ble H e Apex Court.
In sum m, he submit s tted th hat the applic cants are a nott entitled for a any relliefs as sought for in n the OA A. DIS SCUSS SION, ANALYS A SIS AN ND CON NCLUSION
14. The points s of differrences/ /disagrreemen nt as s merated enum d by the t Me ember (A) with w th he resp pective e ngs/observations of Membe findin er (J) are a as u under:
(A) Wheth her memb bers of the Sche eduled d Caste/ /Sched duled Tribe are entittled t to be e consid dered in i gen neral c categorry bas sed on n theirr open m merit;
A And furtther dis sagreem ment arose a re egardin ng (B) Collec ction of qu uantifia able data d ffor granting g reserv vation in prromotion by y enab bling Article A e 16(4) o of the Constiitution n of Ind dia.
15. It is no oticed that t on sue of whethe n the iss er mem mbers off the Schedul S led Ca aste/Scheduled Tribe e are e entitled d to be e eral category based on the considered in gene eir open n meritt ncerned is con d, the Hon'blle Mem mber (J)) in his s orderr dated d 44 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 26.6.2024 after referrin r ng variious ju udgmen nts altthough h considered tthe priinciple of rese ervation n in prromotio on and d own merit m c cases, by b referrring th he insttruction ns/guid delines s mentiioned in DoP&T T's O OM dated d 30.09 9.2016 6 (Anne exure-P P/12 page p 189 reffer) wh herein it has s been n stated d that Solicittor Gen neral h had giv ven an underrtaking g before e the H Hon'ble e Apex x Courtt in th he Conttempt matterr conne ected w with Ja arnail Singh h's cas se(suprra) thatt "untill the main m m matter along with the contemp pt petition is s decid ded no ffurtherr promo otion to o reserv ved cattegory person n to un nreserved pos st will be ma ade ba ased on n DoP& &T OM M dated d 10.8 8.2010 and Railwa ay Boa ard Ciircular dated d 14.10 0.2010""and by b referrring o orders passed d by various v s Hon'b ble Hig gh Cou urts in respec ct to applica a ability of o said d underrtaking g, the Hon'ble H e Memb ber (J) had h op pined th hat the e underrtaking g given n by So olicitor Generral as m mentio oned in n the OM O da ated 30.09.2 3 2016 s still ho olds th he field and d concluded th hat 'ow wn meriit' prom motion for SCs s/STs cannot c t be im mplemen nted in n view of o the s said undertakiing.
Where eas, Ho on'ble Membe er (A) had o observe ed and d expre essed o opinion n to th he effe ect tha at mem mbers of the e Sched duled C Castes and Schedu S uled Tribes arre entitled to o promotion b based on o theirr own m merit, and a tha at the right r to o be considered on n merrit doe es not overla ap witth the e reserv vation in pro omotion n proviided by Artic cles16(4
4) and d 16(4A A) of th he Cons stitutio on. When gran nting rreserva ation in n promotion to SC Cs/STs s, the princ ciple o of own n-meritt selecttion ap pplies, as held d by va arious Constiitution Bench h judgm ments o e Supreme Co of the Hon'ble H ourt, in ncludin ng V.V..
Giri v. D. Susi Dora a, (196
60) 1 SCR 426; Indra a Sawh hney & Othe ers v. Union U o of India a & Otthers, (1992)) Supp p. 3 SC CC 217 7; R.K. Sabha arwal & Oth hers v. State e of Pu unjab & Othe ers, (19
995) 2 SCC 745;
7 M M. Naga araj & Others v. U Union of o India & Others, (2006)) 8 SCC C 212;;
45 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) and Jarna ail Sin ngh & Otherrs v. Union U of India & Others, (20 0 INSC C 881 and 2022 INSC 105). These e Consttitution n Benc ch judgments s of th he Sup preme, Courtt estab blished that SC/ST S candid dates selected s d on merit m in n the ge eneral catego ory cannot be adjustted aga ainst re eserved d categ gory vac cancies s if sele ected on n their own m merit.
Furthe
er by
y refe
erring interrim o
order dated
d
17.05
5.2018iin Jarn nail Singh S (Speciall Leave e Petition No. 30621 of 20 herein the Su 011, wh upreme Court directe ed thatt the penden p cy of the t Sp pecial L Leave Petition P n shou uld nott preve ent the Uniion off India a from m proc ceeding g with h promotions based on "re eserved d to res served,"" "unre eserved d to un nreserve ed," an nd prom motion ns on merit m a and exp pressed d the view v tha at the said in nterim order/ /directiion issu ued by y Hon'b ble Su upreme Courrt subs sequen nt to the Solicitorr Generral's un ndertak king. Therefo T ore, the e said iinterim m orderr dated d 17.5.2008 of o Hon''ble Su upreme Courtt overriide the e earlie er conte ext, efffectively y nulliffies tha at unde ertakin ng. The e Supre eme C Court order of 17 7.05.20 018sup persede es the e Soliciitor Gen neral's earlierr positiion, wh hich wa as contrary to o the la aw, and d align ns with the law w decla ared by y the Hon'ble H e Supre eme Co ourt in variou us Cons stitutio on Benc ch judg gments s refere enced a above.
Furthe er it ha as been n obserrved tha at in a any event, the e law declared d d by th he Hon''ble Su upreme Court prevaiils overr any such underttaking made by th he Go overnme ent orr throu ugh the e Solicittor Gen neral/L Law Offficers to the Hon'ble H e Supre eme C Court or an ny oth her Co ourt, rregardle ess off pliance. Also, consid comp dering p promotion on own merit m is s aright that arises from Article A 16(1) of the Consttitution n and hence h a Funda amenta al Righ ht.
16. So far point of o differrence a as men ntioned herein n above e in para 14 ((A), more partticularlly 'whe ether members s of the e 46 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Sched duled Caste/ /Sched duled T Tribe are a en ntitled to be e considered in gen neral ca ategory y based d on th heir op pen (sicc own) merit' is conc cerned,, in thiis regarrd, it is s pertin nent to o mentiion that the reserv vation in the e mattter of public c emplo oymentt for the t dow wntrod dden/ba ackwarrd clas sses is s provid ded un nder the e Schem me of C Constitu ution o of India a.
16.1 It is a apt to mentio m n that the Co onstituttion Be ench off the Hon'ble H Supre eme Co ourt ha ad an occasion o n to co onsiderr the ambit a a and sco ope of Article A 16 (4) of the Consttitution n of India an nd the provis sions o of gran nt of re eservattion in n promotion iin the case off Indra a Saw whney & Oth hers Vs s UOI & Othe ers, wh herein the Ho on'ble Suprem S me Cou urt vide e judgm ment da ated 16 6.11.19 992 (re eported d in 1992 Sup pp. (3)) SCC 217) h held that 'Article 16 6(4) of the Co onstitu ution off India does not provide p e reserrvation in th he mattter off promotion'. Furth her it was c clarified d there ein tha at 'the e judgm ment sh hall ha ave pro ospectiv ve operration a and sh hall nott affectt the prromotio on alrea ady ma ade, wh hether was made m on n regula ar or a any oth her bas sis'. Fu urther, it was s proviided in n the sa aid jud dgment that 'tthe res servation pro ovided in the e mattter of p promo otion for f SC and ST S (in the Central C l Serviices orr State e Serviices, w will be contin nued for f the e perio od of 5 years s from the da ate of judgme j ent' i.e e. upto o 15.11 1.1997
7. 16.2 Sub bsequen ntly, to o overc come the t diffficulty arisen n with the tim me limit presc cribed for gra ant of rreserva ation in n promotion, the 77thConsttitution nal Am mendme ent was s made e he Con in th nstitution by y 77th Amen ndmentt Act 1995,, where eby Arrticle 16 (4A) wa erted allowin as inse ng the e vation in prom reserv motion..
For re eady re eferenc ce, the e same e is re eproduc ced as s underr:
47 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) "Articlle 16 (4A) "Nothin " ng in this a article shalll preven nt the State from f m making g any p provisiion for r reserva ation in mattters of promotion to o any class or r classes s of po osts in the se ervices underr the State in n favour f r of the e Sched duled C Castes and th he Sch heduled d Tribes which h, in th he opin nion off the S State, are a nott adequa ately represe r ented iin the service es und der the e State."
"
16.3 Based on the t 77th t Const titution nal Am mendme ent, the e DoP& &T had issued d OM dated 13.08.1997 e extendiing the e reserv on in favour of th vation in prromotio he Sch heduled d Caste es and the Sc chedule ed Trib bes bey yond 15 5.11.19 997 tilll such time tthe rep presenttation o of the above two ca ategory y reach hes the e presc cribed percen ntage and a the e same e shalll contin nue to mainttain the e repre esentation to the ex xtent off the prescrib bed perc centage e for th he respective c categorry.
16.4 In th he mea antime, in the e case of R.K K. Sabh harwall & Ors.
O vs s. State of Punja ab & Ors. (supra)), vide e judgm ment da ated 10 0.02.19 995, th he Hon'ble Su upreme e Courtt has introdu uced po ost-based rostter and d also held th hat the e reserv ved ca ategory didates can compe y cand ete forr non-- reserv ved posts and d in th he even nt of th heir ap ppointm ment to o the sa aid pos sts, the eir num mber ca annot be b added and d taken n into consid deration n for workin w ng out the p percenttage off vation. Accorrdingly reserv y, the DoP&T T had issue ed OM M dated d 02.07 7.1997 on iss sue of reserva ation o on postt-based d rosterr for implem mentatiion of Hon'b ble Sup preme Courtt judgm ment in n case of o R.K. Sabha arwal (supra)).
16.5 Furrther th he Hon n'ble Ap ourt in anothe pex Co er case e i.e. in Uniion off India a and others s vs. V Virpal Singh h uhan a Chau and others (1995)
5) 6 SC CC 68 84, helld thatt rosterr pointt prom motees who w were given th he ben nefit off accele erated prom motion would d not get c consequ uentiall seniority. Siince th he Gove ernmen nt was of the opinio on thatt the co oncept of "ca atch-up p" rule was not n in th he inte erest off 48 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) SCs/STs in the matter m o senio of ority on n prom motion, Article e 16 (4A) ( w was thereforre furrther amend ded by the e Consttitution n (85thh Amen ndment) Act 2001 to giv ve the e beneffits off cons sequential seniority y in additiion to o accele erated promo otion. The T Artticle 16 6 (4-A) as am mended d till da ate read ds as fo ollows: -
"16 (4-A A) Nothhing inn this Article A shall prevent p t the S State from makiing any a prrovisio on for r ation in the mattter off prom reserva motion,, with h conseqquentia al senio ority, tto any class or clas sses off posts in the services und der thee State in fav vour off the Sccheduleed Casstes an nd thee Sche eduled Tribes s which,, in the t oppinion of th he Sta ate, ar re nott adequaately represe r ented iin the service es undder thee State."
"
16.6 The aforesa aid am mendme ent dee emed tto have e come e into force f fro om the e year 1995.
116.7 It is requirred to mentio on tha at since num mber off vacan ncies, w which were w re eserved d for SC Cs/STs could not be e filled up d due to o non--availab bility of the e cand didates s belon nging to o these e catego ories, tthe said d unfillled vac cancies s treate ed as b backlog g vacan ncies a and the e same were carried c d forwa ard.
Furthe er, in Indra Sawh hney (s supra), the Hon'ble H e Apex Court held th hat reservatio ons con ntempla ated in a yearr underr Articlle 16 (4
4) shall not ex xceed 50%.
Subseq quently y, OM dated d 29.8 8.1997 was issued d makin ng the 50% limit applica a ble to curren nt as well w as s backllog vac cancies in acc cordan nce with h law laid do own in n Indra a Sawh hney's case (s supra).
Being aggriev ved varrious re epresen ntation ns were e made e by th he stak keholde ers abo out the e injus stice th hat wou uld be e cause ed to membe ers of SCs/S STs wh hich le ed to further f r amen ndmentt to Artticle 16 6 of the e Constitution n of Ind dia, by y 49 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) inserttion off Article 16 (4-B) by the e Cons stitutio on 81stt Amen ndmentt Act 20 000 wh hich rea ads as under:-
Article e 16 (4-B) "Nothiing in this Article A preve ent the e State e from m consid dering any a unf nfilled v vacanc cies of a year r which h are re eserved d for being b ffilled up u in that year y in n accord dance with any p provisio on forr reser rvation n under clause (4) or clause made u e (4-A) a as a se eparate e class o of vaca ancies to t be fiilled up p in an ny succ ceeding g year or years s and such s cllass of vacanc cies sh hall nott be con nsidere ed toge ether w with th he vaca ancies of the e year in n which they are be eing fillled forr determ mining g the sea aling of o 50% % reserv vation on tottal num mber off vacanc cy of th hat yea ar."
16.8 T Thereaftter the e Hon'b ble Sup preme Court in the e case of o M. N Nagara aj Othe ers vs. Union n of Ind dia & Others O s (2006
6) 8 SCC 21 12, vid de judg gment dated 19 Oc ctober,, 2006, held that the 7 77th an nd the 85thC Constitu utionall ndmentts amen (inc cluding g 81st and 82ndC Constitu utionall Amen ndmentts) werre valid d, whic ch mea ans th he stan nd and d decisiions off Goverrnmentt were undou ubtedly stood to the e tests of the jjudicia al scruttiny.
It was furtherr ruled that, iin order to giv ve reserrvation n in promotio on, the State has to o collec ct quan ntifiablle data a showing ba ackward dness of the class and in nadequ uacy off representatiion of that class c iin pub blic em mploym ment in n additiion to c complia ance off Article 335 i.e. i ove erall effi ficiency y of em mploym ment. This T r rule w was reiiterated d in various v s subse equent judgm ments off the Hon'ble Suprem me Cou urt.
16.9 Itt is allso appropria ate to mentiion that the e DoP& d issued OM dated 11.07 &T had 7.2002 accord ding to o which SC/ST candid h the S dates appointe ed by p promottion on n their own merit and not n ow wing to t res servatiion orr xation of qua relax alification will not be b adju usted against a t 50 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) the reserve ed poiint. Th hey w will be adjus sted against a t unres served post. Sub bseque ently, vide OM dated d 31.01 1.2005,, it wa as clarrified th hat th he abov ve OM dated d 11.07 7.2002 did not n app ply to the prromotio ons ma ade by y non-s selectio on metthod. The T OM M date ed 31.0 01.200 05 was s withd drawn b by the next OM O datted 10.08.2010, and Own n Meritt issue was made m ap pplicablle to th he prom motions s made e by selection as welll as no on-selec ction method m .
quently Subseq y, Hon n'ble H High Court C o of Pun njab & ana ha Harya ad set aside a th he DoP P&T OM M dated d 10.08 8.2010,, where eas the e Hon'b ble Bom mbay H High Court, in n the case c off Union n of India Vs All A Ind dia In ncome Tax SC/ST T Emplloyees Welfa fare Federat F tion & Oth hers in n Writt Petition No.8986 6 of 2011, vide judg gment dated d 1.2011 confirrmed th 08.11 he order of CAT C Mu umbai Bench h direc cting to impllementt the above DoP& &T OM dated d 10.08 8.2010
0. It is re equired d to me ention that th he abov ve judg gments s of both the Hon'b ble High h Courrts (Hig gh Cou urt of Punjab P b and Haryan H na as well w the e Hon'b ble High h Courrt of Bo ombay)) have been fu urther challen nged th hrough SLPs a and the e same e ending are pe g before e the Hon'ble Suprem me Cou urt alon ng with h Jarnail Sin ngh's case c an nd in co onnecte ed SLPs s.
Therefo
ore, interim
i m orde
er/judg
gment passe
ed in
n
Jarnail Siingh's case by b the e Hon'b ble Supreme Courtt shall hold th he field d in the e matte er of gra ant of rreserva ation in n promotion.
16.10 0 Un nder the circum mstance es, tthe i interim m orderr/judgm ment pa assed by b the Hon'ble Apex x Courtt in the e matte er of Jarnail Sin ngh an nd oth hers v vs. La acchmii Nara ain Gup pta an nd othe ers with h conn nected S SLPs re equires s to be followe ed in th he pres sent cas se as well.
w 51 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 16.11 1 Furrther, subseq s quently y, on th he basis of report off Ratn naprabha Co ommitttee, s set up p for determ mining g inade equacy of representa ation, b backwa ardness and overalll efficie ency, the Karnata K aka G Governm ment has p passed d Reserrvation Act 2018 and allowed reservatiion in n promotion. T ame has been The sa n confirrmed by y the Hon'ble H e Supre ourt vide judg eme Co gment dated 10.05..2019 in i B K Pavittra (II) case, (2 2019) 6 SCC 129.
Thus, it is th he law of the land that t th he Statte can n eservattion in pro proviide re omotion if its wisdom w m sugge ests in n the fa acts an nd circumsta ances o of the matter m r presenttation of SC of less rep Cs and STs iin a sp pecific c Cadre e.
16.12 2 N Now, it is cle ear th hat if the t ex xercise underr Articlle 16 6(4A), i.e. determ mining g ina adequac cy off representatiion, ba ackward dness(iinapplic cable in the case c off SCs & STs s cand didates)) as h held su ubsequently by b the e ble Sup Hon'b preme Court and ov verall efficien e ncy is carried c d out, and a fou und sattisfacto ory, the e reserv vation iin prom motion,, along g with conse equential sen niority, is allowable e. This s propo osition was ab bundan ar at th ntly clea hat tim me.
16.13 3 T The com mpelling g reaso ons, as s set ou ut by Hon'ble H e Supre eme Co ourt in case of o M. N Nagarajj (supra), hav ve been n interp preted by the Hon'ble Su upreme e Courrt in case c off Jarnail Sin ngh-I case vide jud dgmentt dated d 26.09 9.2018 8 (reporrted in (2018)) 10 SC CC 396
6) wherrein it w was held thatt the co ollectio on of qu uantifia able da ata sho owing b backwa ardness s of the Sche eduled Castes s and the Sc cheduled Trib bes, is s contrrary to the nin ne-Judge Ben nch in Indra I S Sawhne ey case e and the t sam me is held h as s invalid. Rele evant p portion of the e said judgme j ent is re eprodu uced as underr:
"21. T Thus, we co onclude e thatt the jjudgme ent in n Nagara aj (sup pra) doe es not need to be rreferre ed to a 52 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) seven Judge e Bench h. How wever, the c conclus sion in n Nagara aj (sup pra) th hat th he Sta ate ha as to collectt quantif ifiable data showin ng bac ckward dness of the e Schedu uled Ca astes and a the eduled Tribes,, being e Sche g contra ary to the t nine e-Judge e Bench h in In ndra Sa awhney y (I) (supra) is held h to be inva alid to this ex xtent."
16.14 4 During th he pend dency o of final adjudiication in the e matte er of Jarnail Sin ngh an nd oth hers v vs. La acchmii Nara ain Gup pta an nd othe ers, th he Hon''ble Ape ex Cou urt had d found d that in th he meanwhille, varrious H Hon'ble e High h Courtts hav ve deallt with h matte ers wh here re eservattion in n promotions provid ded by the t Cen ntral Governm G ment and a the e State Goverrnmentt to SC Cs and d STs and a th he same e have e been assailled beffore th he Hon n'ble Apex A C Court on o the e nd of violativ groun ve of law la aid dow wn in M. Na agarajj (suprra). Sin nce the cases in the e batch h of ma atters can c be e cated in differrent ca bifurc ategorie es as common c n issue es thatt have been rraised could be dec cided without w t refere ence to o the fa acts of each case, th he Hon''ble Ape ex Cou urt directed to o learned counsel for the parties p tto mak ke theirr submiissions s on th he issu ues tha at had been identiffied by y the learned d Attorn ney Ge eneral of Ind dia, ac ccordingly, va arious points s were formullated fo or deterrminatiion.
By con ng the various pointts as fo nsiderin ormula ated forr minatio determ on, witth regarrd to im mpleme entation of mandate e underr Articlle 16 (4
4), 16 (4A) ( an 4-B) as well su nd 16 (4 uch as s the mandat m te stipu ulated in M. Naga araj (su upra) as a welll B.K. Pavitrra and others s vs. U Union of India a and others s (B.K. Pavittra-II), reporte ed in (2019) 16 SCC 12 29, the e Hon'b ble Ape ex Cou urt ans swered d the various v s pointts vide e detailled jud dgmentt dated d 28.1.2022 in Ja arnail Singh h and others s vs. Lacchm L mi Na arain Gupta G and others s (i.e., referrred as Jarna ail Singh-II case) (reporrted in n (2022
2) 10 S SCC 59 95 whiich hollds the field a and the e same e is also appliicable in i the present p t case.
53 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) 16.15 5 T Thereforre, it is s appro opriate to referr the re elevantt answ wer/clarrificatio on to various v s questtions a and poiints as s record ded by y Hon'ble Apex x Courtt in Ja arnail S Singh--II case e (suprra) such h as :
"1) W What iss the yardstic ck by which, w accord ding to o M M. Nag garaj (supra)), one woulld arr rive att q quantifi fiable data showin ng ina adequaacy off re epresen ntation n of S SCs and ST Ts in public c employmment?
Answe ering to o the afforesaid d point,, the Hon'ble A Apex Court C in n para 17 1 of th he said judgmen j nt held as und der:-
"1
17. Determmination n off in nadequa ate re epresentation of SCs s and STs in n servic ces un nder a State is i left tto the discreti d ion of the t Sttate, as a the determ mination n depen nds up pon m myriad factors s whic ch this s Courrt cann not en nvisage. A con nscious decisio on was taken by th his Courrt in M. Nagara aj (20066) 8 SCC C 212 and a Ja arnail Singh S (rreportedd in (20
018) 10 SCC 39 96) to o leave it to th he State es to fix x the crriteria for f de eterminning inaadequac cy of rep presenttation.
Th he subm mission of the learned d Attorn ney G General for Ind dia thaat this Court C h has to lay l d down th he yardstick fofor measuring adequa acy off representatio on did not yieeld a ffavourable reesult ass this Court C in n Jarnaail Sing gh (sup pra) foound itt befittiing for the Staates to have the t liiberty to t evalu uate the e representation of SCs S a and STs in publlic employmen nt.
Layying do own of c criteria a for deeterminiing th he ina adequac cy of repres sentatioon wou uld re esult in n curtaiiling the e discreetion giiven to the t S State Govern nments. In additiion, t the prevailin ng loc cal con nditionns, wh hich maym re equire to be factorred in,, migh ht not be u uniform..
Mooreover, in M. Nagar raj (suppra), thhis C Court made m it clear tthat the e validiity of law m made by y the State Governments providiing re eservatiion in promoti p ions sha all be d decided on a case-to-case basis for the t pu urpose of es stablish hing whether w r the inadeq quacy of re epresenntation is sup pported by qu uantifiable d data.
Thherefore,, we are re of the e opinio on that no ya ardstick can be b laid down by b this Court for f 54 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) d determinning th he adeqquacy ofo repre esentatiion off SCs and a STss in pro omotionnal pos sts for the t purpose of prov viding re eservattion.
(em mphasis s suppliied)
2) W What isi the unit with respec ct to which h q fiable data showin quantifi ng inaadequa acy off re epresen ntation n is req quired to t be co ollected d?
Answe ering to o the afo oresaid point, tthe Hon n'ble Ap pex Cou urt afterr referriing the law laid down n in R..K. Sab bharwa al and others s vs. State S off Punja ab and d othe ers (199
95) 2 SCC 745, 7 M..
Nagaraj (sup pra), A.K. Sub braman n and others s vs. Un nion off a and others (1975 India 5) 1 SC CC 319, Dr. Chakr radhar r Paswa an vs. State of Bihar and d other rs(1988
8) 2 SC CC 214,, K. Ma anik Ra aj vs. Union U o India of a (1997
7) 4 SC CC 342,, Union n of Ind dia vs. Pushp pa Rani and others s (2008
8) 9 SC CC 242,, State e of Raj ajastha an vs. Fateh F C Chand Soni ((1996) 1 SCC C 562, Union of Ind dia and d anoth her vs. Lieute enant Colonel C l P.K. Choud dhary and others o (2016)
6) 4 S SCC 23 36,Sub-- ector R Inspe Roop La al and d anoth her vs.. Lt. G Governo or and d other rs (200
00) 1 SCC S 64 44 and d instru uctions contaiined in n DoP&T T's OM M dated 02.07.1997, the Ho on'ble A Apex Co ourt in n para 38 3 of th he said Jarnaiil Singh h-II cas se (2022
2) 10 SC CC 595 5 held as a unde er:-
"3
38. In the Office Memo orandum m datted 0 02.07.1997, th he Unio on of In ndia se et out the t p principlles for makin ng and operatting po ost- based rosters s, in which h it h has be een ex xpressly sta ated th hat ca adre iis to be construeed as the n number of po osts inn a p particullar gra ade.It is ma ade cllear thhat ro osters have been prepared grrade-wise w which are a reviiewed o on a yeearly b basis and a th hat reserva r ation in promot p tions is im mpleme ented on o the basis of o thesee roste ers, w which operate o e grade--wise. In M. Nagaraj N j (supr ra), th his Cou urt a approve ed th hat tthe percent p tage of re eservattion in n proomotion ns was s to be a applied to the e entirre cadrre stre ength, as h held in n R.K. Sabha arwal (supraa). Wh hile d doing so o, this Court in M. Nagara aj (supra) m made itt clear that tthe uniit for o operatiion off the ro oster would w b be the cadre c strengthh.
55 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Beffore providin p ng for reserv vation in p promotiions to o a c cadre, the State is obligate ed to collec ct qua antifiabble da ata re egardinng inad dequaccy of reepresenntationn of S SCs an nd STs. Colle ection of infformatiion re egardinng inad dequaccy of reepresenntationn of S SCs and d STs cannott be wiith refe ference to th he entiire serrvice orr 'class s'/'grou up' butt it sh hould be rela atable to the grade//catego ory off posts s to which w p promottion is s sough ht. C Cadre, which should d be thhe uniit for the t p purposee of colllection n of quuantifia able daata in n relaation tot the prom motional postt(s), w would beb mea aningleess if data d peertainiing to o repreesentattion off SCs and a STs Ts is wiith re eferencce to th he entirre serviice." It can n be se een tha at the Hon'ble e Apex Court record ded the e findin ng that "Cadre e" has been h held as the un nit. It is s apt to o mentio on thatt the ca adre's data d is always s in the posses ssion off the Ap ppointin ng Auth hority or o the C Cadre Controlling Au uthority.. And as a such the saiid collecction off data in ndicate inadeq quacy off repres sentatio on of SC Cs and STs S in p public em mploym ment.
3) W Whether r propoortion of thee popullation of SCs s a and STs s to th he popuulationn of Inddia shoould be e ta aken to o be th he test ffor detterminiing ade equacyy off repre esentattion in promo otional posts for f the e p purpose es of Ar rticle 16(4-A)?
?
The Hon'ble H Apex Court C w while an nswering g afores said jud dgmentt in Ja arnail S Singh-III(supra
a) by re eferring g to the e Consttitution n Bench h decis sion in n R.K. Sabha arwal(s supra), M. Nagaraj N j (supra
a), Jarrnail Singh-I S (supra
a) and the su ubmissiions off learne ed Attorrney Ge eneral of o India a, held in para as39 to o 41 as s underr: -
"3
39. In R.K. Sabha arwal (supra),, it wasw ob bservedd that State G Governmments m may taake th he totall popula ation off a partticular B Backwaard C Class and its repres sentatio on in tthe Sta ate se ervices for th he purrpose of o com ming to a co onclusion th hat tthere is in nadequa ate re epresenntation in the SState se ervices.4
40. In M. Nag garaj (su upra), this t Cou urt wass of th he con nsidered d view that the ex xercise of co ollectin ng qua antifiab ble datta dep pends on n numerou us facto ors, witth confflicting claims to be e optimmised byb the admin nistratio on in the t
56 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) coontext of loc cal preevailingg cond ditions in public employm e ment. AAs equuity, jus stice and a effficienc cy are varia able fa actors and are a coontext-sspecific c, how tthese factors fa should be id dentifieed and counte er-balannced wiill depeend on the facts fa an nd circu umstanc ces of e each caase. T The atte empt off the learned Attorne A ey General fo or Indiaa to imp press u upon thiis Courrt that the t proportio on of SCs S and d STs in n the ppopulatiion off Indiaa shoulld be taken as the e test for f d determin ning whether w they are a adequattely re epresen nted in n promo otional posts,, did notn yield ressults.
441. Th his Cou urt in Jarnaiil Sing gh (sup pra) fo ound no n fau ult with h M. Nagara aj (suppra) re egardinng the test for determi d ning the t a adequac cy of represen r ntation in pro omotionnal posts inn the State.
S W While emphas e sising the t ontrastt in the langua co age used d betweeen Artiicle 3 330 and d Articlles 16(4 4-A) annd 16(4-B) of thet C Constituution, this Court decliined t the in nvitatio on of th he learn ned Attoorney G General for f In ndia to hold th hat thee proportion off SCs anda S STs to the t popuulationn of Inddia shou uld be the t te est for fo deeterminning inadequ uacy of re epresenntation in prom motionall pos sts.
T Thereforre, we are nott persu uaded tto expre ess a any opinnion on this as spect. It is for the Staate to o assesss the in nadequa acy of represen r ntation n of S SCs and d STs inn promo otional posts, by takiing in nto accoount rellevant ffactors.."
From the afo oresaid observa ations o of the Hon'ble H Apex Court, C itt parent that Article is app A 1 16(4) off the Constitu C ution of o India a permits the S State Governm G ment to make any pro ovision for the e vation of app reserv pointme ents orr posts s in fa avour of any y backw ward cla ass of ciitizen which, w in n the op pinion o of the State, S is s not ad dequate ely repre esented d in the Service es unde er the State.
S Itt is, the erefore, incum mbent on n the S State Go overnme ent to reach r a conclu usion tthat the e backw ward c class/cllasses ffor whiich the e reserv vation is s made is not adequa a ately rep presente ed in th he State e Servic ces. Wh hile doin ng so, th he Statte Goverrnmentt may ta ake the e total popula ation off a pa articularr back kward c class and a its s sentatio repres on in the S State S Services s. Whe en the State e Goverrnment, after doing the t nec cessary exercis se, mak kes the e reserv vation a and pro ovides th he exte ent of percenta age of posts p to o 57 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) be res served ffor the said ba ackward d class then tthe perc centage e has to o be folllowed sttrictly.
4) S Should there be a ttime period ffor rev viewing g in nadequ uacy off repres sentatio on?
The Hon'ble H Apex Court C w while answering g the afforesaid d point,, held that t it is not within n the p prerogattive of the cou urts to o prescrribe for review of inad dequacy y of reprresentattion such it. Itt is with hin the discretion of th he Statte.
5) W Whether r the decisio d on of M. M Nag garaj (2 2006(8)) S SCC 212
2) is pr rospectiive?
The Hon'ble H Apex Court C w while an nswering the a aforesaid d pointt held that the e decisio on in M. M Nagarraj, is prospec p ctive.
6) W
Whether r quuantifiiable data
a shhowingg
in
nadequuacy off repressentatiion can n be coollected d on the basis b o samp of pling method m ds, as held h by y th his Cou urt in B.K. PPavitra & Ors s. v. Un nion off In ndia & Ors. [(2 (2019) 116 SCCC 129] While answering the e afores said po oint, the e Hon'b ble Apex x Courtt while holding g that Services are d divided into "g groups",, which h urther, b are fu bifurcatted into o cadres s. There e is no c confusion thatt a 'cad dre' is no ot synonymous s to the e 'group p'. Furth her it ha as been n held therein t that th he conclusion n in B.K K. Pavitra-II (supra)) approving th he collec ction off data o on the basis b off "group ps" and d cadres" is conttrary to the de not "c ecision in M. N Nagraj (supra)) and Jarnail Sin ngh-I (supra). Furtther, iit has been n orically held th catego hat "Ro osters a are prep pared cadre-wiise and d not group-w g wise. Sa ampling g metho od whiich was adop pted by y Ratna a Prabh ha Com mmitte ee migh ht be a statis stical formula f a appropriate ffor colle ection of o data. Howeve er, for tthe purrpose off collecttion of quantiffiable data d to a assess the rep presenta ation off SCs and a ST Ts for the pu urpose of prov viding rreserva ation in n promo otion, ca adre, which w is part off "group p", is the unit and a the e data has h to b be collec cted witth respe ect to ea ach cad dre.
At A the s same tim me, Hon n'ble Ap urt also made clear pex Cou c in n para 70 7 of th he said d judgm ment Ja arnail Singh-I S II (suprra) thatt the Hon'ble H Court has not exprressed any op pinion on the e merits s of an ny indiv vidual case c as s answe er has been given g to o 58 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) comm mon issu ues tha at have been fo formula ated afte er hearring the e parties.
16.16 6 It ca an be seen s tha at in Ja arnail Singh--II (suprra), the e Hon'b ble Apex x Court has giv ven com mplete guideline g es-road dmap to o implem ment th he man ndate un nder Arrticle 16 6 (4), 16 (4-A),, 16 (4-- B) off the Constittution of Ind dia as well. The re equisite e mentiioning R R.K. Sa abharw wal (sup pra), M. Nagarraj (supra) and d Jarna ail Sin ngh-I (su upra) in n respect to grrant of reserva ation in n promo otion.
At this stage, it is re equired to be reiterat r ed thatt before e the ju udgmen nt pass sed on 28.1.20 022, i.e e., Jarrnail Singh-II S I (supra
a), the Hon'blle Apex x Courrt vide interim m orderr dated d 17.5.2 2018 d directed d to the e effect that "The pen ndency of this s Specia al Leav ve Petitio on shalll not stand in n the wa ay of Union U off India taking steps for fo the purpose p e of prom motion ffrom "re eserved d to res served" and "u unreserv ved to u unreserv ved" an nd also in the e matte er of prromotio on on merits."
m "
Furtherr vide another a r interim m orde er dated d 05.06 6.2018 8 in con nnected d SLPs i.e., i SLP P (C) No o.28306 6/2017 7, the State S off Maha arashtrra and others s vs. V Vijay Gh hogre and an nother,, Hon'b ble Apex x Court made it i clear that th he Unio on of In ndia is s not debarre d ed from m makin ng prom motion in acc cordanc ce with h law, subje ect to o furth her o orders, pend ding f further r consiideratio on of th he mattter.
ore, priior to aforesa Therefo aid sub bsequen nt orders and d judgm ment pa assed by b the Hon'ble Apex x Courrt in Jarnail J l Singh h-II cas se (sup pra), as s noted d herein nabove, any interim m order or rec cording of pro oceeding g inclu uding u undertak king off Solicittor General with w re espect to non-imple ementattion off DoP& &T OM a and Raiilway Board's c circularr, admitttedly, merged d in the e said su ubsequent ord ders and d judgm ment.
16.17 7 Furrtherit is notticed that in compliance of the e directtions giv ven by the t Hon n'ble Ap pex Cou urt in J Jarnail Singh-- II (su upra), the Do oP&T issued i Office Memorrandum m (OM)) No.36 6012/16 6/2019-Estt. (Res) ( da ated 12 2.04.202 22 pres scribing g 59 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) proced dure to o be folllowed prior p to effectin ng reserrvations s in the e matte er of p promotio ons by y all departments off the Central C l Goverrnment which reads r a underr: -
as " Offfice Me emoran ndum Subjecct: Rese ervationn in pro omotionns proceedure too be folllowed prior p to effectin ng reser rvationns in the e matterr of proomotionns by all depaartments s of the e Centraal Gov vernmen nt. Th he un ndersign ned is s directeed to bring b to o your notice the jud dgementt dated 28.01.2 2022 off the Suupreme Court o of India a in the case off Jarnail Singhh and Ors.
O V. L Lachhmi Narain n Gupta a and Ors.
O (Civ vil Appeal No. 629 off 2022 arising g out off SLP (C C) No. 30621 3 o of 2011) and other co onnected d matters. Puursuant to this s judgemment, the Ld. Attorn ney Genneral foor Indiaa has rrendered d his conside ered oppinion in the e matterr.
2. In n the judgem ment da ated 28.1.202 2 22, the e Supremme Couurt has set ouut the conditio c ons thatt are too be sa atisfied by thee Goverrnment for the e purposse of imple ementin ng th he policy off reserv vation in n promootions. T These conditio c ons are::
(i) C Collectio on of quantifi q iable data d reg garding g inadeq quacy of rep presenttation of Sch heduled d Castes s and Scchedule ed Tribees;
(ii) Ap Applicattion off this d data to t each h cadre e separaately; and a
(iii) Iff a rostter exis sts, the unit fo or opera ation off the ro oster would w b the cadre for be f wh hich thee quantiifiable data would w have too be coollected d and a applied in rega ard to the filling up p of thee vacanc cies in the rostter.
This ju udgeme ent curr rently h holds the e field.
3. All the Min nistries//Departtments are a requ uired to o ensure e that the aboove connditionss are co ompliedd with before e impllementiing th he pollicy off reservvation in n prommotions a and carrying o out anyy promo otions ba ased th hereon.
4. Forr this purpose p e, all M Ministrie es/Departments s are alsso requ uired to ensure the following::
(a) In tterms of DOPTT OM No..43011//153/20010-Esttt (Res.) dated 4.1.201 4 13, the Liaisonn Office er shall ensure e that the t res servation roste ers are strictly y mainta ained as a per the in nstructio ons/guidelines s, 60 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) laid d down ini DOPPT OM No. 36012/2//96-Esttt (Res.), dated 2.7.199 2 97.
(b) In o order to ensurre main ntenanc ce of eff fficiency y of ad dministrration, the DDPC shhall ca arefully y assesss the suitability off the officers, o , beingg considdered fo or promotion.
(c) Th he Appo ointing Autho ority shhall isssue thee appoinntment//promottion o orders only after r satisfy ying its self tha at the cconditio ons me entionedd in parragraphh 2 andd sub-ppara (a)) & (b) of thiss paragrraph haave been n fully c complieed with.
5. Sin nce the e Jarna ail Sing gh batcch of ccases iss pendin ng in the t Suppreme Court of India, any y promootion order o is ssued shall be sub bject too furthe er orde ers tha at may y be passed p by the e Supremme Court in th he said b batch of cases..
6. All Ministtries/Dep epartmeents are e reque ested too urgenttly brin ng thesee instruc ctions to t the nnotice off all th heir atttached/s/subordiinate offices of a as alsoo the Puublic Sector S U Undertaakings and Sttatutory y Bodiess etc.. for adheerence and strictt compliance."
(emph hasis su upplied
d) 16.18 8 From th he afore esaid la atest ins structio ons/guiidelines s issued d by tthe Do oP&T vide OM M dated 12.0 04.2022 2, it is s eviden ntly cle ear thatt there is no bar in n giving g effect to the e Consttitutiona al mandate forr grant of rese ervation n in pro omotion n for wh hich detailed procedu p ure has been prescrib p bed in th he said d OM which w iis as such s in n conso onance with tthe dirrections s issued d by th he Hon'ble Su upreme Court in Jarrnail Singh-II S I (supra
a).
16.18 8.1 Itt is ap pt to mention m n that the sa aid OM M dated d 12.4.2 2022 is not un nder cha allenge in this OA.
Furtherr in adheren a ce to the ins structio ons/guiidelines s stipullated in n the said OM M, the rrespond dents v vide imp pugned d order dated 12.06 6.2023 constittuted the Co ommitte ee and d directted to sttrictly follow f th he direc ctions issued b by DoP& &T vide e OM dated d 2..7.1997 7 as we ell the O OM datted 12.4 4.2022 on the e backd drop of Jarna ail Sing gh-II (s supra) the jud dgment of the e Apex Court as stip pulated in para 3(b) and pa ara 3(e) of the e gned orrder refe impug er.
61 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Therefo ore, the e instru uctions as con ntained in imp pugned d order to stric ctly folllow the directio ons issued on the ba ackdrop p of Ja arnail Singh h-II (su upra) e even for f the e purp pose off examiination of the case c of reserve ed categ gory wh ho have passed d the departm d mental examina e ation (IITO/ITII/Ministterial etc.) e on n genera al stan ndards for im mplemen ntation of 'ow wn me erit" in n promo otion as s per ex xtent OM of Do oP&T and a inte erim dirrections s issued d by Ho on'ble Apex A Cou urt in J Jarnaill Singh h-II case e(supra)) as well as pu ublishin ng the liist of su uch can ndidates s that to oo afterr deration consid n of the e repres sentatio on(s), iff any, th hereon cannott be saiid to ha ave conttrary to o law laiid down n by the e Hon'ble Apex x Courtt on th he subjject nor any right to t be c considerred forr promo otion has been n infrin nged an nd as such s as s noted herein n above e, the sa aid insttruction ns conttained in impu ugned order o in n my co onsidere ed opin nion are e issued d incons sonance e with the t law w laid down d by y the Hon'ble Suprem S me Courrt in the case of R.K.. Sabharwal (supra), M. Na agaraj (supra) and Ja Jarnail Singh-- II (su upra) as s well as insttruction ns conta ained iin DoP& &T OM M dated 22.04.2022.
Even o otherwis se, to follow fo th he dire ections issued by the e DoP& &T in the backd drop of law laid down n by the e Hon'blle Apex x Courtt and th he man ndate off the C Constitu utional s scheme e underr Article e 16(4),, 16 (4--A) and 16 (4-B B) is pa aramou unt duty y of the e State and tthe ste eps in this d direction n to c constitu ute the e Comm mittee fo or the very v saiid purp pose vid de impu ugned orrder by y the re esponde ents can nnot be e said to o be su uffered ffrom an ny legall infirm mities.
16.18 8.2 H Having opined o s I am so, m of the consid dered vie ew thatt the in nstructio ons con ntained in OM dated 30.09.2 3 2016 iss sued by y the DoP&T D h has no sanctitty in lig ght of subsequ uent dirrections s issued d by th he Hon'b ble Ape ex Courrt vide interim m orders s dated d 17.5.2 2018, 5 5.6.2018 8 as we ell the judgmen nt pass sed in Jarnail J l Singh h-II (s supra) dated d 28.1.2022 and subs sequentt instru uctions issued by the DoP&T vide OM M dated d 12.4.2 2022 Suffice to sta ate thatt judgm ment pa assed b by the Hon'ble H e Apex Court as refe ferred herein h above in Jarrnail Singh-II S I 62 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) (supra
a) and d in adherrence to th he sa aid jud dgmentt instru uctions/ /guideliines iss sued by y the DoP&T v vide OM M dated d 12.4.2 2022 ho olds the e field. The T Sta ate is un nder law wful oblligation n to folllow and d complly the said s dirrections s of the e Hon'blle Apex x Courtt and th he instrructions s contaiined in OM da ated 12..4.2022 2 for grrant off reserv vation/reserva ation in n prom motion as a welll 'Prom motion on Me erit' wh hich in ncludes promo otion on 'own n merit'' also as s mand dated un nder th he Schem me of C Constitu ution off India and dirrections s issued d by the e Hon'b ble Apex x Court in this s d in R regard R.K. Sa abharw wal (su upra), M. M Nag garaj (supra), ( , Jarna ail Sing gh-II (su upra).
16.19 9 In view of th he aforesaid fa acts and circu umstanc ces and d positio on of la aw, I co oncur with w the obserrvations s and findings fi s record ded by Hon'ble e Memb ber (A) o on the point of differe ence as s mentiioned ab bove in para 14 4 (A).
17. So far as poin nt of diifferenc ce as mentione m ed in para p 14 4 (B), i.e., C Collectio on of quantif ifiable data for grranting g vation in prom reserv motion by ena abling Article A 16(4A)) of the e Consttitution n is co oncern ned, Honb'le Memb ber (A)) afterr considering the law la aid dow wn in R.K. Sabh harwall (suprra), M. N Nagar raj (sup pra), Ja arnail Singh--I (suprra) and d Jarnail Sin ngh-II (supra) ( ), orderr passe ed by th he coorrdinate e Bench h of CAT, Mumbai in OA No.332/ N /2019 dated d 5.6.2024 an nd 638/2017 dated 5.6.20 024 had d opine ed thatt ould su it wo uffice iff the post p ba ased ro oster p prepare ed and d mainttained in the e mann ner of filling up of the po osts as s presc cribed b by the Consttitution nal Ben nch de ecision of the e Hon'b ble Sup preme Court in the case of o R.K.. Sabh harwall (suprra), the data benchm b mark w would be met a as no further f r requirementt is necessa n ary aftter po ost-base ed ros ster is s mainttained as laid d down n in parra 121 of the e judgm ment in n the case of M. Na agaraj (supra
a) and paras p 17 and d 18 off the ju udgment pas ssed in nail Singh-II (supra n Jarn a). The e data in respect to o inade equacy y of rep presentation within n the cadre c o n services an of Statte and Union nd the rosterr 63 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) mainttained for ea ach cad dre, the e detaiils of in nadequ uacy off SC/S ST rep presenttation in a partiicular cadre e thatt enablles/autthorizes the State or Un nion to implementt reserv vation in pro omotion n in th he case of S SCs/ST Ts. The e said details d of inad dequac cy based on ro oster m maintain ned forr each cadre is suffficient to enable Artticle 16 6 (4-A) of the e Consttitution n and the sa ame is adequ uate to demon nstrate e inade equacy.. There efore, it has been held h by y the Hon'ble H e Memb ber (A A) that if t the ro oster has a already been n mainttained or exiists wiith res spect to o the cadre of the e servic ce an nd de emonstrrates inadeq quacy in SC/ST T representatiion, th he sam me is rrequired d to b be trea ated as s quanttified d data about a inadequ uacy of o repre esentattion off SCs/STs an nd no further f r or ad dditiona al data a collec ction is s required. Th he Hon n'ble Me ember (A) did not de eny colllection n of da ata abo out ina adequac cy of rrepresen ntation n of SC Cs/STs s and only o op pined that t as s per tthe law w laid down by the e Hon'b ble Ape ex Cou urt ros ster maintain ned forr each cadre e shall demon nstrate e the in nadequ uate re epresen ntation of the e SC/S ST in th he cadre.
17.1 On th he otherr hand,, Hon'blle Mem mber (J) in para a 55 off the orrder ob bserved that re esponde ents ha ave not collectted any y data in i rega ard to in nadequ uacy of represe entation n of SC C/ST in n promo otion and mainttaining overrall e efficienc cy in n admin nistratio on. The e data which w a are colllected v vide imp pugned d office order d dated 12 2.6.202 23 with respectt to own n meritt on the e basis of OM M dated 12.4.2022 on n the back b dro op of Jarnail J l Singh h-II (su upra) ju udgmen nt, alth hough Hon'ble e Member (J)) referre ed the instruc ctions contain c ned in OM O datted 12..4.2022 2 issued d by the e DoP& &T in ad dherence e to the e law laiid down n in the e case of o Jarn nail Sin ngh-II (supra) ( and ob bserved in para 61 off his order o th hat the said OM d directed d collec ction of o data a regard ding ina adequa acy of represen r ntation of SCs s/STs and a the e applic cation o of the said s da ata to each cad dre sep parately y and iff rosterr exists s, the unit u of operation of roster would be the e cadre for wh hich qua antifiab ble data a would d have tto be co ollected d 64 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) and applied a in res spect to t fillin ng up vacanc cies in roster,, howev ver, it iis furth her statted tha at nowh here it is state ed thatt princiiple of 'own merit' m would be e considered ffor prom motion.. Accordingly, Hon'blle Mem mber in the sa aid para a do not n find d hing wro anyth ong with h clause 3(b) o of the im mpugne ed orderr but att the same tim me recorded finding f that in claus se 3(e) of the e gned o impug order about a impleme entation n of 'o own merit' m is s conce erned, tthe sam me cann not be implem mented iin view w of the e underrtaking given by b the le earned Solicito or General, whiich stilll hold good g an nd direc cted that work king committee can proceed p d with collectio c on of da ata on all a poin nts inclu uding cllause 3(e), butt they shall n not impllement the principle of o 'own merit' in view w dertakin of und ng given n by lea arned S Solicitorr Genera al given n before e the Ho on'ble S Suprem me Courtt.
In view w of the e afores said opiinion ex xpresse ed by bo oth the e ble Mem Hon'b mbers, itt can be e seen tthat the e Hon'b ble Mem mber (A)) agreed d with necessiity of complian c nce of the t dire ections issued d by the e Hon'b ble Apex x Courtt for colllection of data a in res spect to o inadeq quacy o of repre esentatiion of S SC/ST and by y referring the e very said ju udgmen nt and directio ons iss sued by y the Hon'ble H e eme Cou Supre urt in the t case e of Jarrnail Singh-II S I(supra), it has s been further f opined d that th he roste er main ntained for each h cadre e demon nstrates s the e dettails/da ata of o ina adequac cy off repres sentatio on of SC/ST S and th he sam me is re equired d to be e consid dered b by the concern c ed auth hority to o meet with re equisite e stipullated in n Jarn nail Sin ngh-II (supra). Howe ever, as s noted d herein n above e, although Ho on'ble M Memberr (J) als so agree ed with h the in nstructiions co ontained d in cllauses 3(a) an nd 3(e) of the e impug gned orrder, bu ut based d on the e subm missions of coun nsel forr the applican a nts about app plicabilitty of OM O date ed 30.9 9.2016,, directting th he dep partmen nt not to grrant reservattion in n promo otion on n 'own merit' based b o on the underta u aking giiven by y the le earned Solicito or Gene eral beffore the e Hon'ble Apex x Courtt and accordin a ngly, dirrecting the res sponden nts not to imp plementt the prrinciple of 'own n merit', the sa ame is in n my co onsidered view w not in n conso onance with la aw laid down by the Hon'blle Apex x Courtt in R.K. Sa abharw wal (supra), M. M Nag garaj (supra), ( , 65 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) Jarna ail Sing gh-I (su upra) an nd Jarn nail Sin ngh-II (s supra), as welll as the e instru uctions contain ned in OM datted 12.4.2022 issued d by the e DoP&T T. 17.2 In view w of the e afores said dis scussion, I con ncur with w the e ngs and findin d conclu usion arrived a by the Hon'blle Mem mber (A)) with regard r tto pointt of diffe ference as men ntioned in para a 14 (B)) above e.
18. It is ap pt to mention m that u undispu utedly v vide imp pugned d office order, the respon ndents have only c constitu uted a comm mittee to o exam mine the e directtions given in CBDT's s letterr dated 27.5.2 2019 regardin r ng pros spective e imple ementattion off N.R. Parma P r judgm ment an nd also examin ning th he instru uctions s issued d vide D DoP&T OM da ated 13.8.2021 issued d in adh herence e to the e law laiid down n in K. Megha M ra Sing chandr gh (supra) and d effectiive imp plementa ation off the sa aid judg gment iin the Nagpur N r Region n by Re eview DPCs D sin nce R.Y Y. 1997 to the D DPCs tiill date,, as mentione m ed in para p 3((a) of tthe im mpugned d orderr dated d 12.6.2 2023.Fu urther, the instruc ctions and th he dirrections s contained in n paras 3(b) an nd 3(e) of the impug gned ord der are e aboutt to strrictly fo ollow the insttruction ns conttained in OM M dated 2.7.1997, OM M dated 12.4.20 022 iss sued by the Do oP&T in n complliance o of the ju udgmen nt passe ed by th he Hon'b ble Apex x Courtt in Jarnail S Singh-III (supra
a) to ex xamine the cas ses of re eserved d ory can catego ndidate es who o have passed the departtmentall examiination on gen neral standard d for im mplemen ntation of 'own n merit'' in pro omotion n and after a con nsiderin ng the rreprese entation n with the t ass sistance e of the admin nistratio on and publica ation off list off such c candidates to be b place ed beforre the D DPC and d with a furthe er direc ction th hat finall decision in respect r of 'own n merit'' shall be b take en by th he DPC.
The sa aid insttruction ctions contain ns/direc ning in n paras s 3(a), 3(b) a and 3(e
e) as such s is ssued in con nsonanc ce with h directtions iss sued in light off OM da ated 12.4.2022 2 in adh herence e to judgmentt passe ed in Jarnai J il Sing gh-II (s supra) by the e ble Suprreme Court. Hon'b C Itt is app propriatte to m mention that in n absen nce of a any fina al order of gran nt of prromotion n to an ny class s 66 o.557/2023 ‐ 3rd Memb (OA No ber referencce decision)) or cattegory o of emplo oyees ba ased on n the im mpugned d order,, at this s stage,, I found d substtantial force f in n the su ubmissio ons of counsel c l for the respondents that no o right o of the applican a nts wha atsoeverr d to hav is said ve been infring ged.
19. Therefo ore, I concur c with v view of Hon'ble Mem mber (A)) dismissing th he OA.
20. w of the above In view ussion and forr the forgoing e discu fo g ns, I am reason m in re espectfful agre eementt with the afo oresaid d Orderr/Judg gment dated d 2 26.6.20 024 pas ssed by y the Hon'ble H e Memb ber (Ad dministtrative)) and respectfully, I am not in n agree ement with the t afo foresaid d Orde er/Judg gment dated d 26.6.2024 p passed d by th he Hon'ble Membe M er (J) in the e afores said OA A.
21. Thus, d third Mem mber referen nce iis ans swered d accorrdingly..
(Ja ayesh V V. Bhaairavia)) Membber (Ju udicial)) /ravi/ /