Holding

After the reservation quota is satisfied and the roster ceases, accelerated seniority does not confer any advantage for promotion against general‑category posts; seniority must be determined by the panel position.

Summary

The petitioners, employees of the Punjab Civil Secretariat, challenged the State's reservation policy, arguing that members of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Backward Classes (BC) who had been promoted under the roster system were being given undue advantage in subsequent promotions against general‑category posts due to their accelerated seniority. The Supreme Court held that once the reservation quota is filled and the roster stops, accelerated seniority cannot be used to claim promotion against general‑category vacancies; seniority for further promotion must be determined by the inter‑se panel position, not by the fact of earlier accelerated promotion. The Court declared the 4‑May‑1974 circular invalid to the extent it allowed the roster to operate beyond the quota and reversed the High Court's view that non‑consideration of SC/BC candidates for general posts violated Articles 14, 15 and 16. Consequently, the appeals were allowed and the High Court judgment was partially set aside.

Issues considered

Whether SC/BC candidates promoted under reservation and the roster can claim promotion against general‑category posts on the basis of accelerated seniority.
Whether the roster system continues to operate after the reservation quota is met.
Validity of the circular dated 4‑May‑1974 prescribing a running‑account roster.
Whether the High Court's interpretation that non‑consideration of SC/BC candidates for general posts violates Articles 14, 15 and 16 is correct.
Interpretation of Articles 16(4) and 335 of the Constitution in the context of promotion.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 14, s. Article 15, s. Article 16(4), s. Article 335

Subjects

reservationroster systemaccelerated promotionsenioritypromotionequalityArticle 14Article 16(4)Article 335Scheduled CastesBackward Classespublic employment

Judgment

)

AJIT SINGH JANUJA AND OTHERS A
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

MARCH 1, 1996

B
[J.S. VERMA, N.P. SINGH AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.)

Se1Vice Law-Promotions Rese1Vation for members of Scheduled Cas-
tes and Backward Classes-Applicability of roster system-Accelerated
promotion-Whether such appointees/promotees can claim promotion against C
general category posts in the higher grade, on basis of their 'accelerated
seniority' in the lower grade-field, N&-Constitution of India, Articles 16(4),
335.

The petitioners working in Punjab Civil Secretarial filed writ peti·
lions alleging that the policy for reservation in respect of candidates D
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, was being imple·
mented by the State Government in a manner, because of which the
members belonging to Schednled Castes and Backward Classes were hold·
ing posts in excess to their reservation quota and this was not only
prejudicial but detrimental to the right of the petitioners for being con-
sidered for promotion to higher grade. The writ petitions were dismissed E
by the Full Bench of the High Court holding that non consideration of
Scheduled Caste candidates against general categories posts for purpose
of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the
Constitution and that there was no bar to the appointment/promotion of
larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The High Court relied on F
circulars dated 19·7-1969 and 8-9-1969 for purpose of holding that even
after the percentage reserved in a cadre is filled and the roster is complete,
the members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes can be
promoted against general category posts on basis of seniority. These
appeals had been filed against the judgment of the Full Bench. The
respondents alleged that such appointees/promotees conld be considered G
.>; against posts meant for general category candidates merely becanse they
had become senior on basis of accelerated promotions.

The question raised was, whether, after the members of the
Scheduled Castes/Tribes or Backward Classes for whom specific percent· H
125
\'
126 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A age of posts have been reserved and roster has been provided having been
promoted against those posts on the basis of 'accelerated promotion'
because of reservation of posts and applicability of the roster system, can
claim promotion against general category posts in still higher grade on the
basis of their seniority which itself is the result of accelerated promotion
on basis of reservation and roster.
B
Disposing of the matters, this Court

HELD : 1.1. Once the quota is full and roster has stopped for
members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes in respect of
C whom reservation has been made and roster has been prescribed then their
case for promotion to still higher grade against general category posts
have to be considered not treating them as members of the Scheduled
Castes or Backward Classes "on any crutch". They cannot be promoted
only on basis of their 'accelerated seniority' against the general category
D posts. The accelerated promotions are to be made only against the posts
reserved or roster prescribed. There is no question of that benefit being
available when a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes claims
promotion against general category posts in the higher grade. Snch can-
didates who are members of the Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes
and have got promotion on basis of reservation and application of roster
E before their seniors in the lower grade belonging to general category, in
this process have not superseded them, because there was no inter se
comparison of merit between them. As such when such seniors who belong
to general category, are promoted later it cannot be said that they have
been superseded by such members of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class
F who have been promoted earlier. While considering them for further
promotion against general category posts if the only fact that they have
been promoted earlier being members of Scheduled Castes or Backward
Class is taken into consideration, then it shall violate the equality clause.
As such it will be only rational, just and proper to hold that when the
general category candidate is promoted later from the lower grade to the
G higher grade, he will be considered senior to a candidate belonging to the
scheduled caste/tribe who had been given accelerated promotion against
)
the post reserved for him. Whenever a question arises for filling up a post
reserved for scheduled caste/tribe candidate in still higher grade then sncb
candidate belonging to scheduled caste/tribe shall be promoted first but
H when the consideration is in respect of promotion against the general
)
AS.JANUJAv. STATE 127

category post in still higher grade then the general category candidate who A
has been promoted later shall be considered senior and his case shall be
~ considered first for promotion applying either principle of seniority cum
merit or merit cum seniority. If this rule and procedure is not applied then
result will be that majority of the posts in the higher grade shall be held
at one stage by persons who have not only entered in service on basis of B
reservation and roster but have excluded the general category candidates
from being promoted to the posts reserved for general category candidates
merely on the ground of their initial accelerated promotions. This will not
be consistent with the requirement or the spirit of Article 16(4) or Article
335 of the Constitution. [141-G; 142-B, D; 148-F-H, 149-A-B]
c
1.2 Circular dated 4-5-1974 shall be deemed to be invalid, so far it
says that the reservation prescribed shall be given effect to in accordance
with a roster to be maintained which will be "implemented in the form of
a running account from year to year because the 'running account' is to
operate only till the quota provided under the instruction is reached and D
not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled thereafter
the roster does not survive. [138-D-FJ

Jogi11der Si11gh Sethi v. Punjab Government, (1982) 2 SLR 307, af-
firmed.
E
Jaswant Si11gh v. The Secretary to Govt. of Pu11jab, (1989) 4 SLR 257
FB, Overruled.

R.K Sabharwal v. State of Punjab, [1995] 2 SCC 745 and llldra
Sawhney v. Unio11 of llldia, (1992] S!'ppl. 3 SCC 217, relied on. F
U11ion of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan, J. T. (1995) 7 SC 231; P.S.
Ghalaut v. State of Haryana, (1995] 5 SCC 625 and Direct Recruit Class II
Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., !1990] 2
sec 715, distinguished.
G
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 3792-
3794 of 1989 ETC.

From the Judgment and Order dated 23.8.89 of the Punjab &
Haryana High Court in C.W.P.No. 2190/85, 7860 & 7861 of 1987. H
\
128 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) 3 S.C.R.

A M.M. Kumar, Additional Attorney General, Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, R.K.
Jain, D.V. Sehgal, Sunil Gupta, N.D. Garg, Mahabir Singh, Ms. Meenakshi
Arora, H.M. Singal, G.K. Bansal, RS. Suri, S.K. Bisaria, K.K. Gupta, A.
Mariarputham, Pankaj Kalra, (NP), S.C. Birla (NP), E.C. Agrawala, Prem
Malhotra, (NP) Meenakshi Arora, Sanjay Parikh, R.K. Jain, P..K Kapur,
B Pravcen Jain, S.C: Birla, S.C. Patel, Ejaj Maqbool and Ms. Indu Malhotra
for the appearing parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

N.P. SINGH, J. These appeals have been filed against the judgment
C of a Full Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dated 23.8.1989
dismissing three writ petitions (C.W.P.No. 2190/88, C.W.P.NO. 7860/87
AND C.W.P.No. 7861/87) filed on behalf of the appellants. The petitioners
in C.W.P.No. 2190 of 1988 were working on the posts of Superintendent
Grade I, Superintendent Grade II and Assistant, in Punjab Civil
D Secretariat, Chandigarh. They were members of the cadre of Punjab Civil
Secretariat. The petitioners in C.W.P.No. 7860 of 1987 were working on
the posts of Under-Secretaries/Superintendent Grade I, in the Punjab Civil
Secretariat, Chandigarh, and were members of the cadre of Punjab Civil
Secretariat. The petitiones in C.W.P. No. 7861 of 1987 were working i
against the posts of Deputy Secretaries/Under Secretaries in the Punjab
E Civil Secretariat and were members of State Service Class-I. The primary
grievance made in all these writ petitions on behalf of the different
petitioners, was that the policy for reservation in respect of candidates
belonging to Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, was being imple-
mented by the State Government in a manner, because of which the
F members belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes were
holding posts in excess to their reservation quota. This was not only
prejudicial but detrimental to the right of the petitioners for being con-
sidered for promotion to higher grade. Several other similar writ petitions
had also been filed on behalf of others which were heard together and were
dismissed by the common impugned judgment.
G
The State has been issuing from time to time Government Orders in
respect of reservations for members of Scheduled Castes and Backward
Classes. One such order was issued on 19.10.1949, making 15% reservation
of posts in favour of Scheduled Castes to be filled up from amongst
H candidates who held minimum qualification for the posts. By another order
)
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.] 129

dated 19.8.1952, the percentage of 15% was increased to 19%. By yet A
another order, dated 29.1.1959 roster system was introduced for im-
plementing the policy of reservation. By an order dated 14.1.1964 reserva-
.\
tion was fixed in all classes of posts i.e., I, II, III and IV. However, by an
order dated 23.8.1966, the State withdrew reservation for Class I and II
posts but the reservation in respect of Class III and IV posts were increased B
to 20% On 19.7.1968 a clarification was issued by the State Government
saying that in direct recruitment the roster points shall be taken as seniority
points for Scheduled Castes. By an order dated 4.5.1974, reservation was
reimposed even in respect of Class I and II posts and it was fJXed at 16%
(14% for Scheduled Castes and 2% for Backward Classes). This reserva-
tion was to be provided by applying the roster system. The reservation of C
14% posts for Scheduled Castes was the substantive provisions and the
roster was a machinery provision. By an Order dated 6.6.1974, the quota
of reservation was increased to 25% for Scheduled Castes and 5% for
Backward Classes w.e.f.6.3.1974. On 7.1.1980 the State issued an order, the
relevant part whereof says:-
D
".... it is made clear that those scheduled castes/Backward classes
employees who get appointed/promoted against reserve points on
the basis of their merit/seniority should not be counted for the
purpose of reservation but that reserve point should be carried
over to the next point on the roster and filled by a can· E
didate/employee belong to Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes so
that the deficiency of representation in service is made up''.

The aforesaid Government Order dated 7.1.1980 was considered by the
High Court in the case of Joginder Singh Sethi v. Punjab Government, F
(1982) 2 SLR 307. The operative part of the judgment of the High Court
IS :

"For working out this percentage the promotees/appointees in
this cadre whether on the basis of reservation or otherwise, have
to be taken notice. In the light of this conclusion or ours we hold G
that any promotions of the members of the scheduled Castes and
Backward classes made beyond prescribed limit on the basis of
above noted instructAsrs of the Government are void and nonest''.

Civil Appeal Nos. 3326-27 of 1982, which have been heard along with the H
130 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A present appeals is against the aforesaid judgment of the High Court in the
case of Joginder Singh Sethi (supra). This Court in those appeals on
8.2.1983 pa>Sed an order of stay saying :

"We made it clear by our order dated 19.10.82 that there will
be an interim order of stay against reversion of any of the person
B already appointed on the basis of instructions issued by the Govt.
of Punjab which have been held to be invalid by the Judgment of
the High Court impugned in these appeals and writ petition. We
do not think that there is any doubt in regard to what we said,
namely that no scheduled castes and scheduled Tribes employees
c who has already been appointed or promoted pursuant to the
instructions of the Government of Punjab will not be reverted but
so far as the future appointments/promotions are concerned these
shall be made according to the judgment of the High Court and
these will be ultimately subject to the result of the writ petition
and appeals. If the Govt. makes any appointment/promotions in
D
accordance with the judgment of the High Court the State Govt.
will make it clear in the letter of appointment/promotion that the
appointment/promotion is subject to the result of the writ petition
and appeal so that there is no difficulty in future in case the High
Court judgment is reversed by this Court.. .... "
E
So far the appellants are concerned, they took a stand before the High
Court in writ petitions filed on their behalf that when the reservation quota
was complete, the Scheduled Castes candidates should not further be
appointed/promoted. It was said on their behalf that Scheduled Castes and
F Backward Class candidates who compete on merit, should also be adjusted
against the quota reserved for them, otherwise there shall be increase in
the percentage of the quota reserved for them. The writ petitions were
referred to a Full Bench of the said High Court. Before Full Bench it was
also submitted that Scheduled Castes and Backward Class candidates
cannot be considered for appointment/promotion against general category
G posts in a cadre. The Full Bench however said in the case of Jaswant Singh
v. The Secretary to Gol't. of Punjab, (1989) 4 SLR 257 that non-considera-
tion of Scheduled Castes candidates against general category posts for
purpose of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16
of the Constitution. It also observed that there was no bar to the appoint-
H ment/promotion of larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The
j
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.] 131

members of the Scheduled Castes, appointed on merit or promoted on A
seniority-cum-fitness basis shall not be taken into consideration for working
-I out the reserved percentage. The High Court also said that roster points
were seniority points. In result the Full Bench over-ruled the view taken by
the same High Court in the aforesaid Joginder Singh Sethi's case. The
conclusion of the Full Bench is :
B
"Thus, while non-Scheduled Caste candidates are not eligible for
appointment or promotion to the reserved posts at the reserved
point, the Scheduled Castes candidate are eligible to compete with
the general category candidate in respect of the posts which are
not reserved and also claim promotion to the same if they are C
otherwise eligible by virtue of seniority and merit and merely
because they happen to be members of the Scheduled Caste, they
cannot be deprived of their right to compete for appointment or
promotion on the basis of seniority and merit that is constitution-
ally protected under Articles 14 and 16(1)(2) of the Constitution
even when the total number of Scheduled Castes members in that D
cadre holding posts are more than the prescribed percentage.
Secondly, where Scheduled Caste/Backward Class secure an ap-
pointment against 11 a reserved point" on the basis of his own merit
and seniority and not on the basis of only his being Scheduled
Caste/Backward Class such candidate should not be counted while E
calculating the percentage of reservation meant for Scheduled
Caste/Backward Class, but that reserved point should be carried
over to the next point on the roster and filled by candidates
belonging to Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes. Thirdly,
Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes candidates who are appointed
or promoted on the basis of appropriate reservation under the F
prescribed roster point shall be assigned seniority as per the point
reserved for them in the relevant roster irrespective of their posi-
tion in the general merit list in case of direct recruitment in Class
I, II, III and IV service. In other words, roster points are the
seniority points in respect of Scheduled Castes Backward Classes.
In the case of Scheduled Castes/Backward Classes candidate get- G
ting selected or promoted on his own merit/seniority, he will retain
his original higher seniority position secured by him. The seniority
cannot be ambivalent and fluctuating.

It was further said : H
\
132 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] 3 S.C.R.

A "We have already held that reservation does not mean that the
Scheduled Castes candidates are deprived from being considered
for promotion to the general category seats on the basis of
seniority-cum-merit or on the basis of selection on merit. It also
not possible to invoke the principle of reservation not exceeding
50 per cent on the total strength as reaching above 50 per cent is
B
not by reason of any such reservation as such it so happened that
the candidates who competed for the selection belonged to a
particular category and all of them were found to be suitable on
merit and ability. It has been pointed out in the counter statements
that on a number of occasions previously all these posts were held
c by non-Scheduled Castes. But if two Scheduled Castes has already
come purely on merit it is, to be taken as a matter gratifying and
not to be frowned upon. It is only if reservation in effect amounted
to an unreasonable percentage that could if at all be questioned.
The percentage of reserved candidates in this case is only 14 and
if the Scheduled Castes candidates have come and occupied that
D
position in that cadre on account of their own merit and ability,
the reservation itself could not be questioned and they could not
be deprived of their right to be considered for selection on the
basis of merit and ability. We are, therefore, unable to accept the
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
E Scheduled Castes candidates cannot be considered for the vacant
postn.

On the aforesaid findings the different writ petitions were dismissed by a
common judgment as already referred to above.
F
It may be mentioned that some of the questions raised in the cases
of Joginder Singh Sethi (supra) and Jaswant Singh (supra) came up for
consideration before a Constitution Bench in the case of R.K. Sabharwal
V. State of Punjab, [1995] 2 sec 745, on a writ petition filed by members

of the Punjab Service of Engineers (Class I) in Irrigation Department,
G belonging to the general category challenging the policy of reservation in
connection with promotion to higher posts. The respondents to the said
writ petition were members of the Scheduled Caste. On behalf of the
petitioners in that case a stand was taken that the (i) object of reservation
was to provide adequate representation to the Scheduled Castes!fribes
H and Backward Classes in service and if more than 14% of Scheduled Castes
J
AS. JANUJAv. STAIB [N.P. SINGH, J.] 133

candidates are appointed/promoted in a cadre on their own merit/seniority A
by competing with general category candidates then the purpose of reser-
vation in the said cadre having been achieved the Government instructions
in respect of reservation would become inoperative and (ii) once the posts
earmarked for Scheduled Castes(fribes and Backward Classes on the
roster are filled, the reservation is complete and the roster cannot operate
any further and has to be stopped. Any post falling vacant, in the cadre
B
thereafter is to be filled from category reserved or general-due to retire-
ment etc., of whose members the post fell vacant. In respect of the first
question mentioned above, it was said :

"When a percentage of reservation is fixed in respect of a C
particular cadre and the roster indicates the reserve points, it has
to be taken that the posts shown at the reserve points are to be
filled from amongst the members of reserve categories and the
candidates belonging to the general category are not entitled to be
considered for the reserved posts. On the other hand the reserve
category candidates can compete for the non-reserve posts and in D
the event of their appointment to the said posts their number
cannot be added and taken into consideration for working out the
percentage of reservation. 11

It was further said :
E
"The fact that considerable number of members of a Backward
Class have been appointed/promoted against general seats in the
State Services may be a relevant factor for the State Government
to review the question of continuing reservation for the said class
but so long as the instructions/rules providing certain percentage F
of reservations for the Backward Classes are operative the same
have to be followed. Despite any number of appointees/promotees
belonging to the Backward Classes against the general category
posts the given percentage has to be provided in addition."

In respect of the second question as to whether once the posts earmarked G
for Scheduled Castes(fribes and Backward Classes on the roster are filled
and the reservation is complete the roster can operate any further, the
Constitution Bench said :

"We see considerable force in the second contention raised by H
\
134 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A the learned counsel for the petitioners. The reservations provided
under the impugned Government instructions are to be operative
in accordance with the roster to be maintained in each Depart-
ment. The roster is implemented in the form of running account
from year to year. The purpose of "running account" is to make
sure that the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and Backward
8 Classes get their percentage of reserved posts. The concept of
"running account" in the impugned instructions has to be so inter-
preted that it does not result in excessive reservation. "16% of the
posts .... " are reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes and
Backward Classes. ln a lot of 100 posts those falling at Serial
c Numbers 1, 7, 15, 22, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 80, 87, and 91 have
been reserved and earmarked in the roster for the Scheduled
Castes. Roster points 26 and 76 are reserved for the members of
Backward Classes. It is thus obvious that when recruitment to a
cadre starts then 14 posts earmarked in the roster are to be filled
from amongst the members of the Scheduled Castes. To illustrate,
D
first post in a cadre must go to the Scheduled Caste and thereafter
the said class is entitled to 7th, 15th, 22nd and onwards up to 91st
post. When the total number of posts in a cadre are filled by the
operation of the roster then the result envisaged by impugned
instructions is achieved. In other words, in a cadre of 100 posts
E when the posts earmarked in the roster for the Scheduled Castes
and the Backward Classes are filled the percentage of reservation
provided for the reserved categories is achieved. We see no jus-
tification to oprate the roster thereafter. The "running account" is
to operate only till the quota provided under the impugned instruc-
tions is reached and not thereafter. Once the prescribed percent-
F
age of posts is filled the numerical test of adequacy is satisfied and
thereafter the roster does not survive.

It was said thereafter that vacancies arising in the cadre after the operation
of the roster and the "running account" comes to an end, they have to be
G filled up from amongst category to which posts belonged in the roster. It
was illustrated by saying :

"For example the Scheduled Caste persons holding t.he posts
at roster points 1, 7, 15 retire then these slots are to be filled from
H amongst the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes. Similarly,
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH, J.] 135

if the persons holding the post at points 8 to 14 or 23 to 29 retire A
then these slots are to be filled from among the general category.
By following this procedure there shall neither be shortfall nor
excess in the percentage of reservation11 •

It was also said that the operation of a roster for filling the cadre strength
by itself ensures that reservation remains within 15% limit. It was B,
demonstrated by an illustration as to what shall be the consequences if the
roster is permitted to operate in respect of the vacancies arising after the
total posts in a cadre are filled by saying :
i
"We may examine the likely result if the roster is permitted to C
operate in respect of the vacancies arising after the total posts in
a cadre are filled. In a 100-point roster, 14 posts at various roster
points are filled from amongst the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe candidates, 2 posts are filled from amongst the Backward
Classes and the remaining 84 posts are filled from amongst the
general category. Suppose all the posts in a cadre consisting of 1()() D
posts are filled in accordance with roster by 31.12.1994. Thereafter
in the year 1995, 25 general category persons (out of 84) retire.
Again in the year 1996, 25 more persons belonging to the general
category retire. The position which would emerge would be that
the SchedUled Castes and Backward Classes would claim 16% E
share out of the 50 vacancies. If 8 vacancies are given to them then
in the cadre of 100 posts the reserve categories would be holding
24 posts thereby increasing the reservation from 16% to 24%. On
the contrary if the roster is permitted to operate till the total posts
in a cadre are filled and thereafter the vacancies falling in the cadre
are to be filled by the same category of persons whose retirement F
etc. caused the vacancies then the balance be!Ween the reserve
category and the general category shall always be maintained.'

Reliance was also placed on the judgment of nine Judges Bench in the case
of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, (1992) Supp. 3 SCC 217 at page 737 G
para 814 where it was said :

'Take a unit/s.ervice/cadre comprising 1000 posts. The reserva-
tion in favour of Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes and Other
Backward Classes is 50% which means that out of the 1000 posts
500 must be held by the members of these classes i.e. 270 by other H
136 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A Backward Classes, 150 by Scheduled Castes and 80 by Scheduled
Tribes. At a given point of time, let us say, the number of members
OBCs in the unit/service/category is only 50, a shortfall of 220.
Similarly the number of members of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes is only 20 and 5 respectively, shortfall of 130 and
75. If the entire service/cadre is taken as a unit and the backlog is
B sought to be made up, then the open competition channel has to
be choked altogether for a number of years until the number of
members of all Backward Classes reaches 500, i.e., till the quota
meant for each of them is filled up. This may take quite a number
of years because the number of vacancies arising each year are not
c many. Meanwhile, the members of open competition category
would become age-barred and ineligible. Equality of opportunity
in their case would become a mere mirage. It must be remembered
that the equality of opportunity guaranteed by clause {1) is to each
individual citizen of the country while clause (4) contemplates
special provision being made in favour of socially disadvantaged
D
classes. Both must be balanced against each other. Neither should
be allowed to eclipse the other. For the above reason, we hold that
for the purpose of applying the rule of 50% a year should be taken
as the unit and not the entire strength of the cadre, service or the
unit as the case may be''.
E
The controversy which has been raised in the present appeals is: whether,
after the members of Scheduled Castes/Tribes or Backward Classes for
whom specific percentage of posts have been reserved and roster has been
provided having been promoted against those posts on the basis of 'ac-
F celerated promotion because of reservation of posts and applicabilicy of
the roster system, can claim promotion against general category posts in
still higher grade on the basis of their seniority which itself is the result of
accelerated promotion on basis of reservation and roster? The learned
counsel, appearing for the appellants, took a clear and definite stand that
they have no grievance or objection if members of the Scheduled Castes
G or Backward Classes, for whom reservation has been made and roster has
been prescribed even in the promotional posts, get accelerated promotions
against those posts. But the question is: whether, on this basis such 'ac-
celerated promotees' from lower grade to higher grade in service can claim
promotion against the general category posts in still higher grade of service
H merely because they had been promoted before the general category
.t
•

A.S.JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,L] 137

candidates, who were senior to them in the lower grade and have been A
promoted later in their turn? In other words, is the benefit of extra seniority
obtained by a reserved category candidate by earlier promotion under the
reservation policy to the reserved post, also available to him for competing
with his otherwise senior general category candidate, who got promoted to
the same cadre later only because. of the reservation policy, for promotion B
to a general category post also in the next higher grade.

The High Court has relied on circulars dated 19.7.1969 and 8.9.1969
for purpose of holding that even after the percentage reserved in a cadre
is filled and the roster is complete, the members of the Scheduled Castes
and Backward Classes can be promoted against general category posts on C
basis of seniority. It may be inentioned that the aforesaid circulars do not
refer anything about reservation in promotional posts or in respect of roster
to be maintained in the form of a "running account". It appears that it was
by oversight that for purpose of coming to the conclusion aforesaid refer-
ence has been made to those circulars. However, the circular which is
relevant in this connection is No. 1494-SWI-74/8105 dated 4.5.1974, which D
y· had been challenged by the appellants before the High Court. The relevant
part whereof is as follows:-

"I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and to say
that at present reservation for Scheduled Castes and Backward E
Classes is applicable in promotions to and within class III and IV
only. Since these Castes/Classes are poorly represented in various
higher services in the State Government, it has been under the
active consideration of the State Government that some reservation
in promotions within higher services as well should be made for F
them. It has now been decided that except in the case of All India
Services, 16% of the posts to be filled by promotion to or within
Class I and II services under the State Government should be
reserved for members of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes
(14% for members of Scheduled Caste and 2% for members of
Backward Classes) subject to the following conditions:- G

(a) the persons to be considered must possess the minimum
necessary qualifications, and

(b) they should have a satisfactory record of service. H
138 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996)3 S.C.R.

A (2). In a lot of 100 vacancies occurring from time to time, those
falling at serial numbers mentioned below should be treated as
reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes:

~~~~~~~s~~~~~~M~w=
Vacancies falling at serial numbers 26 and 76 should be treated as
B reserved for the members of Ba.ckward Classes.

(3) The reservation wescribed shall be given effect to in accord-
ance with a roster to be maintained in each Department. The roster
will be implemented in the form of a rnnning account from year to
C year......... "

(emphasis supplied)

Before we examine the grievance of the appellants regarding the members
of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, who have been given 'ac-
D celerated promotions' because of'the policy of reservation and applicability
of the roster system, being considered against general category posts in still
higher grade, it will be proper to point out that the aforesaid circular dated
4.5.1974 shall be deemed to be invalid, so far it says that the reservation
prescribed shall be given effect to in accordance with a roster to be
E maintained which will be 'implemented in the form of a running account
from year to year' because of the judgment of the aforesaid Constitution
Bench of this Court in the case of R.K. Sabharwa/, (supra), the Constitution
Bench has clearly and categorically said that the "running account" is to
operate only till the quota provided under the instruction is reached and
not thereafter. Once the prescribed percentage of posts is filled thereafter
F the roster does not survive. As such there is no question of implementing
the roster in the form of 'running account' from year to year as provided
in the circular dated 4.5.1974.

In view of the judgment of this Court in the case of R.K Sabharwa/
(supra) that a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes who
G enters in service by process of direct recruitment and is appointed on his
own merit belongs to a class different from the class who are appointed at
the initial stage or are promoted thereafter, applying the principle of
reservation and system of roster, the appellants now cannot make any
grievance if a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class, who has
H entered into service on his own merit having competed with the general
f
'

A.S.JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH,J.] 139

category candidates, is considered and promoted in the higher grade on A
the posts which are in the general category because of his seniority and
-~ merit. The rub is as to whether the members of the Scheduled Castes or
Backward Class who have been appointed/promoted on basis of the policy
of reservation and system of roster can also claim. to be promoted against
general category posts in higher grade on basis of their 'accelerated
promotions'. The appellants have also no objection if accelerated promo- B
tions in still higher grade posts are given to such appointees/promotees
applying the roster system i.e. against the posts reserved for them till the
period of five years fixed by this Court in the case of India Sawhney (supra)
i expires. But whether such appointees/promotees can claim promotion
against general category posts in the higher grade, on basis of their c
seniority in the lower grade having been achieved because of the ac-
celerated promotion or appointment by applying the roster.

In R.K. Sabharwa/'s case, this Court has treated the members of the
Scheduled Castes and Backward -Classes in two categories i.e. those who
are appointed or promoted having competed with general category can-
D
didates on merit and those who are appointed/promoted on basis of
y reservation and roster. For those who _have competed on merit it has been
held that their number is not to be taken into consideration while working
out the percentage of reservation. In respect of those members of
S.cheduled Castes and Backward Classes, who have been ap- E
pointed/promoted on the basis of reservation and roster, it has been said
in clear and unequivocal terms that tile "running account" shall stop after
the quota provided under the instructions is reached and the roster cannot
be operated thereafter. In other words, there is no question of promoting
further number of such candidates, who have been appointed/promoted on
-\"• F
the basis of reservation and roster.

If the contention of the respondents is accepted as has been done by
the High Court that such appointees/promotees can be considered against
posts meant for general category candidates merely because they ha:;e
become senior on basis of accelerated promotions then, according to us, G
that exercise .shall amount to circumventing the judgment of the Constitu-
• tion Bench of this Court in the Sabharwa/' case, because for all practical
purposes the promotions of such candidates are being continued like a
running account although the percentage of reservation provided for them
has been reached and achieved. Once such reserved percentage has been H
140 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A achieved and even the operation of the roster has stopped, then how it will
be permissible to consider such candidates for being promoted against the
general category posts on the basis of their accelerated promotion, which
has been achieved by reservation and roster.

Recently, this Court in the case of Union of India v. Virpal Singh
B Chauhan, J.T. (1995) 7 SC 231 = [1995] 6 SCC 684, Mr. Justice B.P. Jeevan
Reddy, speaking for the Court, has said:

"Hence, the seniority between the reserved category candidates
and general candidates in the promoted category shall continue to
c be governed by their panel position. We have discussed herein-
before the meaning of the expression "panel" and held that in case
11
of non-selection posts, no panel" is prepared or is necessary to be
prepared. If rn, the question arises, what did the circular/letter
dated August 31, 1982 mean when it spoke of seniority being
governed by the panel position? In our opinion, it should mean
D the panel prepared by the selecting authority at the time of selec-
tion for Grade 'C'. It is the seniority in this panel which must be
reflected in each of the higher grades. This means that while the rule
of reservation gives accelerated promotion, it does not give the
accelerated - or what may be called, the consequential - seniority."
E
It has been further said:

"In other words, even if a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe
candidate is promoted earlier by virtue of rule of reservation/roster
than his senior general candidate and the senior general candidate
F is promoted later to the said higher grade, the general candidate
regains his seniority over such earlier promoted Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate. The earlier promotion of the
Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate in such a situation does
not confer upon him seniority over the general candidate even though
G the general candidate is promoted later to that category."

It was also said:

"It is true that this case presents a rather poignant turn of
events. Of the thirty three candidates being considered for eleven
H vacancies, all are Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates.
}
AS.JANUJAv. STATE[N.P.SINGH,J.] 141

Not a single candidate among them belongs to general category. A
The learned counsel for the respondent is justified in complaining
that appellants have failed to explain how such a situation has come
about. Not only the juniors are stealing a march over their seniors
but the march is so rapid that not only erstwhile compatriots are left
far behind but even the persons who were in the higher categories at B
the time of entry of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates
in the service have also been left behind. Such a configuration could
not certainly have been intended by the framers of the Constitution
or the framers of the rules of reservation. In the absence of any
explanation from the authorities, the best we can do is to ascribe
i
it as faulty implementation of the rule of reservation. In other C
words, not only have the Railways not observed the principle that
the reservation must be vis-a-vis posts and not vis-a-vis vacancies
but they had also not kept in mind the rule of seniority in the
promotion posts enunciated in the Railway Board's circulars
referred to supra. Yet another principle which the authorities D
appeared to have not observed in practice is that once the per-
centage reserved for a particular reserved category is satisfied in
y that service category or grade (unit of appointment) the rule of
reservation and the roster should no longer be followed. Because
of the breach of these three rules, it appears the unusual situation
complained of by the general candidates has come to pass. The E
learned counsel for general candidates is right that such a situation
is bound to lead to acute heart-burning among the general candidates
which is not conducive to the efficiency of administration."

(emphasis supplied)
F
Once the quota is full and roster has stopped for members of the
Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes in respect of whom reservation
has been made and roster has been prescribed then their case for promo-
tion to still higher grade against general category posts have to be con-
sidered not treating them as members of the Scheduled Castes or G
Backward Classes "on any crutch". They cannot be promoted only on basis
of their 'accelerated seniority' against the general category posts. In R.K
Sabharwal's case it was said that the candidates belonging to Scheduled
Castes who compete on their own merit along with general category
candidates then they are not to be counted within the percentage of H
142 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] 3 S.C.R.

A reservation made for such candidates in the service, because they have
competed with the general category candidates on their own merit. The
same principle which has been enunciated by the Constitution Bench in the
aforesaid case shall be applicable whenever a member of Scheduled Castes
or Backward Classes has got accelerated promotion to a higher grade and
B is to be considered for further promotion to still higher grade against
general category posts. The accelerated promotions are to be made only
against the posts reserved or roster prescribed. There is no question of that
benefit being available when a member of Scheduled Castes or Backward
Classes claims promotion against general category posts in the higher
grade. It need hardly be pointed out that such candidates who are members
C of the Scheduled Castes or Backward Cla.sses and have got promotion on
basis of reservation and application of roster before their seniors in the
lower grade belonging to general category, in this process have not super-
seded them, because there was no inter se comparison of merit between
them. As such when such seniors who belong to general category, are
D promoted later it cannot be said that they have been superseded by such
members of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class who have been promoted
earlier. While considering them for further promotion against general
category posts if the only fact that they have been promoted earlier being
members of Scheduled Castes or Backward Class is taken into considera-
tion, then it shall violate the equality clause and be against the view
E expressed not only in the case of R.K Sabharwal (supra) by the Constitu-
tion Bench, but also by the 9 Judges Bench in the case of Indra Sawhney
(Supra) where it has been held that in any cadre reservation should not
exceed beyond 50%. The 50% posts already being reserved against which
promotions have been made then any promotion against general category
F posts taking into consideration that they are members of the Scheduled
Castes or Backward Classes, shall amount to exceeding the limit fJXed in
the case of Indra Sawhney (supra).

In the Indra Sawhney's case in respect of the question regarding
providing reservation in promotion, it was said by B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J
G with whom it appears seven out of nine Judges constituting the Bench have
agreed while one Hon'ble Judge did not express any opinion on that
question :

"We see no justification to multiply 'the risk', which would be
H the consequence of holding that reservation can be provided even
AS.JANUJAv. STATE[N.P.SINGH,J.] 143

in the matter of promotion. While it is certainly just to say that a A
handicap should be given to backward class of citizens at the stage
of initial appointment, it would be a serious and unacceptable
inroad into the rule of equality of opportunity to say that such a
handicap should be provided at every stage of promotion
throughout their career. That would mean creation of a permanent B
separate category apart from the mainstream - a vertical division
of the administrative apparatus. The members of reserved
categories need not have to compete with others but only among
themselves. There would be no will to work, compete and excel
among them. Whether they work or not, they tend to think, their C
promotion is assured. This is turn is bound to generate a feeling
of despondence and 'heart-buring' among open competition mem-
bers. All this is bound to affect the efficiency of administration.
Putting the members of backward classes on a fast-track would
necessarily result in leap-frogging and the deleterious effects of
"leap-frogging" need no illustration at our hands. At the initial stage D
of recruitment reservation can be made in favour of backward class
of citizens but once they enter the service, efficiency of administra-
y tion demands that these members too compete with others and
earn promotion like all others no further distinction can be made
thereafter with reference to their "birth-mark", as one of the E
learned Judges of this Court has said in another connection. They
are expected to operate on equal footing with others. Crutches
cannot be provided throughout one's careeL That would not be in
the interest of efficiency of administration nor in the larger interest
of the nation. It is wrong to think that by holding so, we are F
confining the backward class of citizens to the lowest cadres. It is
well- known that direct recruitment takes place at several higher
levels of administration and not merely at the level of Class IV and
Class Ill. Direct recruitment is provided even at the level of All
India Services. Direct recruitment is provided at the level of G
District Judges, to give an example nearer home. It may also be
noted that during the debates in the Constituent assembly, one
referred to reservation in promotion; it does not appear to have
been within their contemplation."

It cannot be disputed that the first promotion to such candidates was H
144 SUPREMECOURTREPORTS (1996) 3 S.C.R.

A given without judging him on principle either seniority-cum-merit or merit-
cum-seniority in the lower grade. It was given by applying principle of
reservation and roster. The impugned circular dated 4.5.1994 quoted above
itself says that it had been decided that the 16% of the posts are to be filled
up by promotion to Class-I and Class-II services under the State Govern-
ment, have been reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes and
B Backward Classes subject to the conditions (a) the persons to be con-
sidered must possess the minimum necessary qualifications, and (b) they
should have a satisfactory record of service. Thereafter the roster has been
fixed in different grades for their accelerated promotions. In this back-
ground, while considering tllem for promotion to general category posts in
C still higher grade posts, the fact that they had been promoted earlier on
basis of the policy of reservation and applying the roster system cannot be •
overlooked. It also cannot be overlooked that at the first promotion from
the basic grade, there was no occasion to examine their merit and suitability
for purpose of their promotion. The only requirement prescribed is that
they should possess the minimum necessary qualifications and they should
D have satisfactory record of service. In actual working, it can be
demonstrated by an example. In grade 'C' which is the grade of initial entry
in the service, there are 10 posts. On basis of roster the reserved category
candidates are at Serial Nos. 2, 6 and 10 whereas general category can-
didates are at Serial Nos. 1,3,4,5,7,8 and 9. On basis of reservation and
E. roster system, the reserved category candidates at SI. Nos. 2 and 6 are
promoted to grade 'B' first. Thereafter SI. Nos. 1,3 and 4 are promoted
who belong to general category. In.grade 'A' which is still the higher grade,
there are only 3 posts, out of which one is reserved for members of the
Scheduled Castes. The candidate who had been promoted on basis of
reservation to post at SI. No. 2 will be promoted before general category
F candidates at SI. Nos. 1,3 and 4 to one of the 3 posts on basis of reservation.
Now so far the two remaining posts in grade 'A' are concerned, are meant
for general category candidates. But if the principle of "running account"
is applied. and only the earlier promotion of the candidate who was at SI.
No. 6 is taken into consideration, then he shall be promoted to grade 'A'
G against the second, out of three posts although the quota of reservation
and roster is complete with the promotion of the reserved category can-
didate at SI. No. 2 against one of the three pasts. So out of the three posts
in grade 'A' two shall be filled up by reserved category candidates beyond
the limit of reservation and without any roster being available. Jn this
process the merit of the reserved category candidate at SI. No. 6 has not
H been considered. It need not be pointed out that but for principle of
)
A.S.JANUJAv. STATE[N.P.SINGH,J.] 145

reservation and roster, he could not have been promoted earlier than A
candidates at SI. Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in grade 'C'. In this background, can it
not be said that he has been promoted to the second post in grade A
because he is a member of Scheduled Caste, although the post was to be
filled up from amongst general category candidates?

The Constitution Bench in R.K Sabharwal has said in clear and B
unambiguous terms that after the quota is over and roster points are full,
then the "running account" of roster shall stop and there is no question of
promoting beyond the posts which had been reserved. In the said judgment
it has been said in respect of members of Scheduled Castes that if they are
appointed/promoted on their own merit, then such candidates shall not be C
counted towards the percentage of reservation fixed for them. On the basis
of the same logic, whenever members of the Scheduled Castes are to be
considered for promotion against posts which are not reserved for them,
then they have to be selected on merit only. They cannot claim that as they
had been promoted earlier from grade 'C' to grade 'B' on basis of reser-
vation and roster in this process they have superseded the candidates D
belonging to the general category and even for promotion against general
category posts in grade 'A' only requirement shall be satisfactory record of
service.

On behalf of the respondents, reliance was placed on the judgment
of P.S. Gha/aut v. State of Haryana and Others, [1995] 5 SCC 625, in support E
of contention that while applying the roster point the merit list prepared
for candidates by· process of direct recruitment can be disturbed for
placement of the candidates belonging to reserved category, at the relevant
roster print and it shall not be violative of article 14 or 16 of the Constitu-
tion. That judgment has no b!'aring, so far the present case is concerned. F
In that case roster was being applied in respect of posts reserved under
the relevant Rules, which were being filled up by process of direct recruit-
ment. That case related to process of direct recruitment to the initial cadre
of service on basis of principle of reservation and roster.

On behalf of the respondents it was urged that in the case of Union G
of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan (supra) the view expressed by this Court
in respect of inter se seniority between the reserved category candidates
who had been promoted on basis of reservation and roster earlier than the
general category candidates who were senior in the lower grade, and who
have been promoted later, has not to be applied in all services. According H
146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [19%] 3 S.C.R.

A to the respondents that view was expressed on basis of the circular which
was under consideration, in that case where it had been provided that the
seniority of the general category candidate was to be restored vis-a-vis the
reserved category candidate after the general category candidate was
promoted later. According to us, this question cannot be examined only
on basis of any circular, order or rule issued or framed by any State
B Government or the Union of India. This has to be tested on basis of our
constitutional scheme of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

On behalf of the respondents, a stand was also taken that in view of
the Constitution Bench Judgment in the case of Direct Recrnit Class II •
C Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., [1990] 2
SCC 715, the date of entry in the service determines the seniority of the
officer concerned. As the reserved category candidates in the afores3id
illustration had been promoted from grade 'C' to grade 'B' before the
general category candidates who were senior to them in the lower grade
D 'C', the seniority of the reserved category candidates is fixed and deter-
mined with reference to the dates of promotion in grade 'B' and they shall
rank senior to the general category candidates who were promoted later
although they were senior to them in the grade 'C'. This Court in the case
of Direct Recrnit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of
Maharashtra & Ors., (supra) was not considering the question of inter se
E seniority of categories, who have been promoted on basis of reservation
and roster and those who have been promoted from lower grade to higher
grade on consideration of seniority-cum-merit or merit-cum-seniority.
There the question under consideration, was as to how to fix the seniority
of persons entering in service from different sources i.e. by process of
F direct recruitment and promotion. The policy of reservation cannot be
implemented in a manner to block the merit channel and to make it dry.
It is so heartening to note that for whom the founding fathers introduced
the provision for reservation to protect and encourage entry in service, now
are able to enter service on their own merit by competing with candidates
of general category. For promotion or appointment of a member of
G Scheduled Caste against the post reserved for him the primary question
to be considered is as to whether be belongs to a class for whom reservation
has been made. But for being considered for appointment or promotion
against a general category post, merit is the primary consideration because
the applicant is to enter into the service or grade of service through merit
H channel.
AS. JANUJAv. STATE [N.P. SINGH, J.] 147

When framers of the Constitution by Article 16 guaranteed equality A
of opportunity in matters of public employment, they aimed at combining
democratisation with efficiency. In the process of democratisation Article
16(4) enabled the State to make provisions for reservation of appointments
or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion ~
of the State is not adequately represented in the services under the State. B
As has been pointed out by this Court that at the same time Article 335 of
the Constitution enjoins to take into consideration the claims of the mem-
bers of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes "consistently with the
maintenance of efficiency of the administration" while the making of ap-
pointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the union
or of a State. Thus it has been conceived by our Constitution that a process C
should be adopted while making appointments through direct recruitment
or promotion in which the merit is not ignored. For attracting meritorious
and talented persons to the public services, a balance has to be struck,
while making provisions for reservation in respect of a section of the
society. This Court from time to time has been issuing directions to
maintain that balance in the public services so that there should not be D
discontentment, heart-burning and frustration, which can never be held to
be in the larger interest of the society. It has been pointed out in the case
of Indra Sawhney (supra) that reservation in promotions at various stages
has resulted in considerable discontentment because many senior persons
inspite of their efficiency and dedicated work find themselves superseded E
by their juniors belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Tribes for that reason
alone. In many cases seniors to their horror find themselves made junior
to even those who actually worked as their subordinates due to this factor
alone. All concerned who are involved and interested in the uplift and
growth of the nation have to work out a system by which the injustice done
to a section of people in our society at certain period of history can be F
rectified by providing protections to their descendants, but we have to be
conscious, at the same time that the efficiency of the administration of the
country is not harmed and there is no reverse discrimination. Promotion is
an important incident of service. It covers both advancemenl between
grades within the same class and between different classes. Seniority in G
service is one of the important factors in making promotion. Even where·
process of promotion by selection is adopted, seniority has an importance
in case of equal merit. The principal object of a promotion system is to
secure the best possible incumbents for the higher position while maintain-
ing the morale of the whole organisation. The best public interest is served
when equal opportunities for promotion exists for all qualifi.ed employees. H
148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A Civil servants are able to move up 'the promotion ladder' as the merit
deserves and the vacancies occur. Right to equality enshrined in the
Constitution is to be preserved by preventing reverse discrimination as well.
The guarantee of equality requires maintenance of original or panel inter
se seniority between the general category candidate and the earlier
B promoted reserved category candidate under the reservation policy, for
promotion to the higher general vacancy. The equality principle requires
exclusion of the factor of extra weightage of earlier promotion to a reserved
category candidate because of reservation alone, when he competes for
further promotion to a general category with a general category candidate,
senior to him in the panel. Any other view would amount to reverse
C discrimination and violative of the guarantee of equality in Articles 14 to •
16.

We respectfully concur with the view in Union of India v. Virpal Singh
Chauhan, (supra) that seniority between the reserved category candidates
and general candidates in the promoted category shall continue to be
D governed by their panel position i.e. with reference to their inter se seniority
in the lower grade. The rule of reservation gives accelerated promotion,
but it does not give the accelerated 'consequential seniority'. If a Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidate is promoted earlier because of the rule
of reservation/roster and his senior belonging to the general category
E candidate is promoted later to that higher grade the general category
candidate shall regain his seniority over such earlier promoted scheduled
caste/tribe candidate. As already pointed out above that when a scheduled
casie/tribe candidate is promoted earlier by applying the rule of reserva-
tion/roster against a post reserved for such scheduled caste/tribe candidate,
in this process he does not supersede his seniors belonging to the general
F
category. In this process there was no occasion to examine the merit of
such scheduled caste/tribe candidate vis-a-vis his seniors belonging to the
general category. As such it will be only rational, just and proper to hold
that when the general category candidate is promoted later from the lower
grade to the higher grade, he will be considered senior to candidate
G belonging to the scheduled caste/tribe who had been given accelerated
promotion against the post reserved for him. Whenever a question arises
for filling up a post reserved for scheduled caste/tribe candidate in still
higher grade then such candidate belonging to scheduled caste/tribe shall
be promoted first but when the consideration is in respect of promotion
H against the general category post in still higher grade then the general
}
A.S.JANUJAv. STATE(N.P.SINGH,J.] 149

category candidate who has been promoted later shall be considered senior A
and his case shall be considered first for promotion applying either prin-
ciple of seniority cum. merit or merit cum seniority. If this rule and
procedure is not applied then result will be that majority of the posts in
the higher grade shall be held at one stage by persons who have not only
entered in service on basis of reservation and roster but have excluded the B
general category candidates from being promoted to be posts reserved for
general category candidates merely on the ground of their initial ac-
celerated promotions. This will not be consistent with the requirement or
the spirit of Article 16(4) or Article 335 of the Constitution.

According to us, the Full Bench was not justified in saying in the case C
of Jaswant Singh v. the Secretary to Govt. of Punjab, (supra) that non
consideration of Scheduled Castes candidates against general category
posts on basis of their prior promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and
16 of the Constitution. That view shall be deemed to be against the
pronouncement of this Court by the nine Judges Bench in the case of Indfa D
Sawhney (supra} as well as the view expressed by the Constitution Bench
in the case of R.S. Sabharwal (supra}. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed
Y and that part of the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Jaswant ·
Singh v. The Secretary to Govt. of Punjab, (supra) is reversed. Now the case
of the appellants and others similarly situated should be considered in the
light of this judgment. We are not inclined to examine individual grievances E
and to work out the effect of the views expressed by us. That shall be done
by the State Government. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there
shall be no orders as to cost.

CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 4763-65/89. F
WITH

C.A. Nos. 3326/82, 3327/82, 3795/89, 5023/89, I.A. Nos. 1 & 2 in W.P.
54/90, SLP(C} 14541/90 (C} 7259/90, 2976/83, 17374/94.
G
N.P. SINGH, J. All the above matters are disposed of in terms of the
judgment of this Court in the case of Ajit Singh Januja & Ors. v. State of
Punjab & Ors., (Civil Appeal Nos. 3792-3794 of 1989) delivered today.

R.A. Matters disposed of.