The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave the go-ahead to the Centre for providing reservation in promotion in government jobs for employees belonging to the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe category in “accordance with law”.
In a relief to the Centre, the apex court gave the order after taking into account the government’s submissions that the entire promotion process has come to a “standstill” due to the orders passed by various high courts and also direction by the apex court for “status quo” in a similar matter in 2015.
A vacation bench comprising Justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and Ashok Bhushan said the Centre was not “debarred” from making promotions in accordance with law in the matter subject to further orders.
“It is made clear that the Union of India is not debarred from making promotions in accordance with law, subject to further orders, pending further consideration of the matter,” it said.
Union minister and Lok Janshakti Party president Ram Vilas Paswan welcomed the court order, saying it will re-open the doors to the members of the SC and ST communities for promotion in government jobs.
“I thank the Supreme Court for its verdict on reservation in promotion to the SC/ST employees in government jobs. The doors that were closed will now re-open,” the Dalit leader said.
Paswan, the Union Minister for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, also expressed his gratitude to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for pursuing the matter so that the court was approached during the summer vacation and the case was put up before it by the additional solicitor general.
The government said there were separate verdicts by the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay and Punjab and Haryana on the issue of reservation in promotion to SC/ST employees and the apex court had also passed different orders on appeals filed against those judgments.
“We will say you (Centre) can go ahead with promotion in accordance with law,” the bench told additional solicitor general Maninder Singh, representing the Centre.
During the hearing, the ASG cited the case laws on the issue of quota in promotion in government jobs and stated that the apex court’s 2006 judgment in M Nagaraj case would be applicable.
The M Nagaraj verdict had said that creamy layer concept cannot be applied to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes for promotions in government jobs like two earlier verdicts of 1992 Indra Sawhney and others versus Union of India (popularly called Mandal Commission verdict) and 2005 E V Chinnaiah versus state of Andhra Pradesh, which dealt with creamy layer in other backward classes category.
Singh said the petition before the bench was the Centre’s challenge to the Delhi High Court’s August 23 last year verdict quashing government’s order extending reservation in promotion to employees belonging to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes beyond five years from November 16, 1992.
At the outset, the ASG referred to orders passed by the apex court earlier, including a reference made to a five-judge Constitution bench, and contended that one of the orders says there would be “status quo” as far as reservation in promotion to SC/SC employees was concerned.
He referred to a May 17 order passed by a bench headed by Justice Kurian Joseph in a similar matter in which it was said that pendency of petition before it shall not stand in the way of the Centre taking steps for the purpose of promotion.
“How the promotion is taking place as of now?,” the bench asked.
Responding to the query, the ASG said, “They are not. It is all standstill. This is the problem”.
“I am the government and I want to give promotion as per constitutional mandate,” he told the bench and urged that he was seeking a similar order as passed on May 17.
He said that another bench of the apex court had earlier said that a five-judge Constitution bench would examine the issue as to whether the M Nagaraj judgment, which dealt with the issue of application of the ‘creamy layer’ for reservation to SC and ST categories in promotion in government jobs, was required to be re-looked at or not.
He also referred to Article 16 (4A) of the Constitution, which enables state to provide for reservation in matters of promotion to SCs and STs which in its opinion were not adequately represented in the services.
“That is the enabling provision,” the bench observed.
It said that as per Article 16 (4A), state would have to make out a case for providing reservation in promotion to SCs and STs based on quantifiable data.