Dhanna Ram vs Union Of India & Ors
- SCC(1996) 8 SCC 691
- Neutral1996 INSC 547
- AIRAIR 1997 SC 126
- SCR[1996] Supp (1) SCR 564
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a selection list for promotion has expired by efflux of time and no vacancy existed in the reserved quota at the time of selection, a court cannot direct the appointment of a candidate from the reserved category, even if the selection authority initially communicated his selection on general standards and later corrected the error by placing him in the reserved quota; however, this does not preclude the candidate from consideration for future promotions in vacancies that arise after the expired selection list.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
O R D E R Leave granted. Heard learned counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from the Order of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Chandigarh made in O.A. No.308 of 1994 on March 21, 1995. Though the Tribunal has dismissed the O.A. on the ground of delay, we have examined the matter on merits. It is now clear from the record placed by the respondents that as a result of selection, list was prepared on April 4, 1990 for appointment as Goods Clerks and Coaching Clerks from among the class IV employees in the order of merit from the quota reserved for class IV employees. Out of them they also made reservation to the members of the Scheduled Castes. The appellant belongs to the Scheduled Castes. Candidates at item Nos.17 and 32 of the list also belong to the Scheduled Castes and were superior in the order of merit; they were selected on the general standard to the roster point as against those who were selected in the reserved quota with relaxed standards. The appellant stands at No.2 while one Sarvan Kumar stands at No. 1 of the list of reserved quota. It is true that in the communication sent to the appellant it was mentioned that he was selected on general standards. It would appear that subsequently, they realized the mistake and corrected the same and put him in the order of merit as a candidate for the reserved quota. Since there was no vacancy existing for reserved quota, he could not be appointed. Under those circumstances we cannot give any direction for making his appointment. Since the list has already expired by efflux of time, the directions sought for appointment in the future vacancies cannot be given. But this order does not preclude him from consideration for future promotions in any of the vacancies that would arise subsequent to the earlier selection.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free