Supreme Court of India
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.versusP. RAVINDER & ORS.
- Citation
- 1991 INSC 190
- Decided
- 13 August 1991
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- RANGANATH MISRA
Holding
An administrative tribunal cannot override the explicit restriction in a government policy order; the 5% weightage is confined to selections conducted by the State Public Service Commission, and any extension beyond that is beyond the tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Summary
The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued an order on 18 November 1981 granting a 5% weightage to candidates whose basic education was in Telugu medium for appointments to non‑gazetted posts, expressly limiting the benefit to selections made through the State Public Service Commission (SPSC). The State Administrative Tribunal extended this benefit to the selection of Sub‑Inspectors of Police, which was conducted by a State level Recruitment Board, and the State Government appealed. The Supreme Court examined whether the Tribunal had the authority to broaden the scope of the government order and whether such an extension violated Article 14 of the Constitution. It held that the order was a policy decision of the State Government, clearly confined to SPSC selections, and that the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by reading down this restriction. Consequently, the Court declined to intervene in the policy choice and reinstated the original limitation. The appeal was allowed and the Tribunal’s order was vacated without any costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the State Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to extend the 5% weightage benefit to selections made by bodies other than the State Public Service Commission.
- Whether the government order conferring a 5% weightage to Telugu‑medium candidates, limited to SPSC selections, violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
- Whether courts can review or modify a policy decision of the State Government regarding recruitment preferences.
Legislation cited
Subjects
government policyadministrative lawjurisdictionpublic service commissionlanguage preferenceArticle 14tribunalweightageselectionnon‑gazetted posts
Judgment
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.
A
v.
P. RA VINDER & ORS.
AUGUST 13, 1991
B [RANGANATH MISRA, CJ AND KULDIP SINGH,JJ.)
Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules.
Andhra Pradesh Government's Order dated 18.11.81-Appoint-
ment to Non-Gazetted posts of all services-Weightage of 5% marks to
candidates who have obtained basic educational qual(fications through
c Telugu Medium-Applicability of order confined to selection carried
through State Public Service Commission-Whether arbitrary-Benefit
of order whether applicable to selection made through bodies other than
the State Public Service Commission.
D The Government of Andhra Pradesh· issued an order dated
18.11.81 which provided thal in respect of appointments to Non-
Gazetted posts of all services, candidates who have obtained their basic
educational qualification through the medium of Telugu shall be given
weightage of 5% marks. But the benefit of the order was confined to
selection made through the State Public Service Commission. The State
E Administrative Tribunal held that the order applies to all selections
irrespective of the body that makes selection in the State and extended
the benefit of the order to the selection of the Suh-Inspectors of Police
made through the State level Recruitment Board. Against the order of
the Tribunal, the State of Andhra Pradesh filed an appeal to this Court.
F Allowing the appeal, this Court,
HELD: I. The Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in lifting the
restriction imposed by the Government in the matter of benefit of 5%
marks. The order of the Tribunal is vacated. [567D-E)
G 2. The State Government is the authority to take a policy deci-
sion. Whether the decision is tenable or not in law, is not to be decided
by the Court. Since Government in their wisdom have specifically con-
fined the application of the Notification to recruitment through the
State Pnblic Service Commission, the decision of the Tribunal that it
was also available to be extended to selection through bodies other than
H the State Public Service Commission, cannot be appreciated. (566H, 567A)
564
GOVT. OF A.P. v. P. RA VIND ER 565
3. When the Notification is specific and is intended to apply to a A
specified group of cases for selection, it would not be open to the Tri·
bunal to extend its application beyond what has been clearly specified.
It is one matter to say that the Notification applied in a limited way may
be hit by law; it is another to say that contrary to the restriction
imposed, the Tribunal would allow the Notification to have general
application. [S67C] B
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.
1694-1709 of 1991.
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.1.1990 of the A.P.
Administrative Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh in R.P. Nos. 13986/89, C
24045-50/89, 25091/89, 1027 & 2111/89, 28925-26/89, 28929 to 31/89
and 0.A. No. 1918 of 1990.
K. Madhava Reddy and G. Prabhakar for the Appellants.
M.K. Ramamurthi, S. Markandeya and Ms. C. Markandeya for D
the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
This is an appeal by the State Government of Andhra Pradesh by
special leave. Challenge is to the order of the State Administrative E
Tribunal .directing the benefit of the Government Order of 18. 11. 1981
to be extended to selection of the Sub Inspectors of Police which is
done through the State level Recruitment Board. The Government
Order which has been extracted in the Order of the Tribunal reads
thus:
F
"Notwithstanding anything in the Andhra Pradesh State
and Subordinate Service Rules or the Special Rules, candi·
dates seeking appointment of all the non-gazetted posts of
all services, and seeking eligibility in general educational
test who have obtained the basic educational qualifications
prescribed for direct recruitment eligibility for promotion G
in the special rules governing such posts, through Telugu
medium, shall be given weightage in the matter of selection
to such posts by awarding them 5% of the total aggregate
maximum marks of the relevant competitive examination
held by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission for
recruitment acquiring eligibility to such posts. H
566 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1991] 3 S.C.R.
"Having regard to the avowed policy of the Government to
A
introduce Telugu progressively in the State in the coming
years and as Telugu has been introduced as official
language at Directorage level and also in the lower courts
in certain Districts of the State and so as to !live prefe-
rence to candidates who have obtained the basic educa-
B tional qualification through the medium of Telugu,
Government have after careful examination decided in
consultation with the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Com-
mission that such candidates to give weightage of 5% of the
total aggregate maximum marks of all the ,competitive
examinations of the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Com-
mission for recruitment to all the non-gazetted posts of all
c services."
There is no dispute that the Order in its own terms applies to selection
carried on through the State Public Service Commission; nor is there
any dispute that the selection of Sub Inspectors, for the rel°"ant
D period was being carried on by a body other than the State Public
Service Commission.
The Tribunal observed as follows:
"We cannot the rule too literally and defeat the object and
E purpose with which it has been made. If the object and
purpose are kept in view, then we have no hesitation in
holding that it applies to all selections irrespective of lhe
body that makes selections in the State. We see no merit in
the literal construction suggested by Sri Sagar."
F We are told that the validity of the Government Notification ,is
under challenge on the ground that the Government have no authority
to make such a direction and that challenge is in an independent peti-
tion pending disposal before this Court. Since this petition is not one
challenging the Notification but seeking its ex1ension to areas not
covered by the Notification in terms, disposal of this petition has no
G bearing on the petition which challenges the Notification.
The State Government is the authority to take a policy decision.
Whether the decision is tenable or not in law, as we have just pointed
out, is not to be decided here. But since Government in their wisdom
have specifically confined the application of the Notification to recruit-
H ment through the State Public Service Commission, we have not been
GOVT. OF A.P. v. P. RAVINDER 567
able to appreciate the decision of the Tribunal that it was also available
A
to be extended to selection through bodies other than the State Public
Service Commission.
Mr. Ramamurti appearing in support of the respondents' cause
has pointed out that if the Government Notification is confined to
selection through the State Public Service Commission, the Govern- B
ment Notification would be hit by Article 14 of the Constitution.
Therefore, according to Mr. Ramamurti, it was open to the Tribunal
to read down the requirement by saying'that the benefit of the Notifi-
cation would be applicable to all categories of selection.
We have not been able to agree with Mr. Ramamurti that when
the Notification is specific and is intended to apply to a specified group C
of cases for selection, it would be open to the Tribunal to extend its
application b~yond what has been clearly specified. It is one matter to
say that the Notification applied in a limited way may be hit by law;
it is another to say that contrary to the restriction imposed, the Tri-
bunal would allow the Notification to have general application. We are D
inclined to agree with Mr. Madhava Reddy for the State that the
Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in lifting the restriction imposed by
the Government in the matter of benefit of 5% of total aggregate
marks to those candidates who wrote their papers in Telugu language.
The appeal is allowed and the order of the Tribunal stands vacated. No
costs. E
T.N.A. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "government policy"Sign in to search