B.P.JEEVAN REDDY - (1.) LEAVE granted in special leave petitions.
(2.) THESE appeals/writ petitions raise an important but difficult question concerning the nature of rule of reservation in promotions obtaining in the Railway service and the rule concerning the determination of seniority between general candidates and candidates belonging to reserved classes in the promoted category. The issue is best illustrated by taking the facts in the first of these matters, viz.. Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan. The appeal is preferred against the judgment of the central Administrative tribunal (Allahabad bench) disposing of Original Application No. 647 of 691 1986 with certain directions. [It was originally tiled as a writ petition in the Allahabad High court which, on the constitution of the central Administrative tribunal (Allahabad bench), was transferred to the tribunal,] It was filed by, what may be called for the sake of convenience, employees not belonging to any of the reserved categories (hereinafter referred to as "general candidates" - which means open competition candidates). The Railway Administration as well as the employees belonging to reserved categories, i.e.. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were impleaded as respondents. The writ petition/original application came to be filed in the following circumstances: Among the category of Guards in the Railway service, there are four categories, viz.. Grade 'C', Grade 'B', Grade 'A' and Grade 'A' Special. The initial recruitment is made to Grade 'C' and they have to ascend rung after rung to go upwards. The promotion from one grade to another in this category is by seniority-cum-suitability. In other words, they are "non- selection posts". The rule of reservation is applied not only at the initial stage of appointment to Grade 'C' but at every stage of promotion. The percentage reserved for Scheduled Castes is 15 per cent and for Scheduled Tribes 7.5 per cent. a total of 22.5 per cent. To give effect to the rule of reservation, a forty point roster was prepared in which certain points were reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively, commensurate with the percentage of reservation in their favour. For Scheduled Caste candidates, the places reserved in the roster were: 1, 8, 14, 22. 28 and 36 and in the case of Scheduled Tribe candidates, they were: 4, 17 and 31. Subsequently, a hundred-point roster has been prepared, again reflecting the aforesaid percentages. In the year 1986, the position was that both the petitioners in the original application (general candidates) and the party-respondents in the said original application (members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) were in the grade of Guards Grade 'A' in the Northern Railway. On 1/8/1986 the Chief Controller, Tundla passed orders promoting certain general candidates on ad hoc basis to Grade 'A' Special. Within less than three months, however, they were sought to be levelled and in their place, members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes were sought to be promoted. Complaining that such a course of action is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, the general candidates approached the High court, which petition, as stated above, was transferred to the tribunal. The general candidates asked for three reliefs, viz., (a) to restrain the Railway authorities from filling up the posts in the higher grades in the category of Guards by applying the rule of reservation: (b) to restrain the Railway Administration from acting upon the illegal seniority list prepared by them; and (c) to declare that the petitioners (general candidates) are entitled to be promoted and confirmed in Guard Grade 'A' Special on the Strength of their seniority earlier to the reserved category employees. Their contention, in short, was (1 that once the quota prescribed for a reserved category is satisfied, the rule of reservation - or the forty-point roster prepared to give effect to the said 692 rule - cannot be applied or followed any longer and (2 that the forty-point roster is prepared only to give effect to the rule of reservation. It may provide for accelerated promotion but it cannot give seniority also to a reserved category candidate in the promoted category. According to them, the seniority in Guard Grade 'C' should govern and should be reflected in all subsequent grades notwithstanding the earlier promotion of the members of the reserved categories. Their case was that even if a reserved category member 'X' is promoted from Grade 'C' to Grade 'B' earlier than his senior 'Y' (general candidate), the position should be that when the general candidate also gets promoted later to Grade 'B' he should regain his seniority over 'X' in Grade 'B' which means that in Grade 'B', 'Y' again becomes senior to 'X', They submitted that this should be the rule to be followed to ensure that command of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India prevails. They relied upon two decisions of the Allahabad High court and another decision of the Madhya Pradesh High court in support of their contention. They also relied upon certain circulars of the Railway Board in this behalf. The case of the Railway Administration (Respondents 1 to 4 in the original application) was that the Administration is maintaining separate seniority lists for each of the grades in the category of Guards according to the policy in vogue. The ad hoc promotions of general candidates ordered on 1 8-1986 were irregular inasmuch as the seniors in the category of Grade 'A' Guards were ignored and juniors promoted by the Chief Controller, Tundia. The Chief Controller, Tundia was not competent to order the said ad hoc promotions. The promotions ordered later of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates is strictly in accordance with the seniority position in Grade 'A' and is unobjectionable. The Administration submitted that seniority is determined on the basis of the date of promotion and since promotion effected applying the forty-point roster cannot be said to be an ad hoc promotion, a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate promoted earlier to a particular grade becomes senior to another candidate, general or otherwise, who is promoted to that grade later. In short, according to them. the dale of promotion to a particular grade determines the seniority in that grade.
(3.) THE reserved candidates (respondents in the original application) supported the stand of the Administration. THEy submitted that the seniority list pertaining to Guards Grade 'C' is not relevant and cannot be followed in the matter of promotion to Grade 'A' Special from Grade 'A'. For the purpose of promotion to Grade A Special, the seniority list pertaining to Grade 'A' should be followed and since in that grade, the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates were seniors, they were entitled to be promoted to Grade 'A' Special earlier than their juniors in that seniority list. THEy submitted that the seniority in a grade should be determined according to the date of promotion/appointment to that grade and not in any other manner. THEy submitted that inasmuch as in the higher grades, the representation of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe members was quite inadequate, the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates obtained rapid 693 promotions from one grade to another but it is neither contrary to the rules nor is it inconsistent with Articles 16 and 14, In fact, the very rule of reservation in promotions is meant to increase the representation of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates in the higher echelons of services quickly. No exception can be taken to the said rule, they submitted. Since the tribunal has strongly relied upon two decisions of the Allahabad High court and a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High court, it would be appropriate to refer to their ratio briefly.;