Holding

The Court held that the state must objectively fix a lower qualifying percentage for SC/ST candidates, consistent with efficiency, to ensure equality of opportunity, and may also consider age relaxation for them.

Summary

The petitioners, SC/ST law graduates, challenged Haryana's Rule 8 which required a uniform 55% aggregate mark for all candidates in the Judicial Service examination, alleging it denied them equality of opportunity despite a 20% reservation. The State argued the mark ensured efficiency. The Supreme Court examined the constitutional mandate under Articles 14, 15, 16, 38 and the purpose of public employment, emphasizing that efficiency must be balanced with affirmative measures for historically disadvantaged groups. It held that the state must objectively determine a lower qualifying percentage for SC/ST candidates, consistent with efficiency, and also consider age relaxation for them. Consequently, the Court directed the government to fix such a minimum mark before the next selection and modified the High Court order, disposing of the writ petition and appeal.

Issues considered

Whether a uniform 55% qualifying mark for all candidates in the Haryana Judicial Service examination violates the constitutional guarantee of equality of opportunity for SC/ST candidates.
Whether the state can prescribe a lower qualifying percentage for SC/ST candidates without compromising the efficiency required for judicial recruitment.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 14, s. Article 15, s. Article 16, s. Article 234, s. Article 309, s. Article 38
Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 (as adapted by Haryana)s. Rule 7, s. Rule 8

Subjects

equality of opportunityreservationscheduled castesscheduled tribesjudicial service examinationminimum qualifying markspublic employmentefficiencyage relaxation

Judgment

RAM BHAGAT SINGH AND ANR.
A
v
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

APRIL 4, 1990

[SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ, K.N. SAIKIA AND B
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.]

Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 (As adapted
by Haryana State): Part C-Rule 8-Haryana Judicial Service
Examination-Prescription of 55% marks in aggregate for qualifying-
Whether results in denial of equality of opportunity to scheduled castes/
scheduled tribes candidates. c
Constitution of India: Articles 14, 15, 16 & 38-Haryana Judicial
Service Examination-Fixation of 55% marks in aggregate for qualify-
ing-Whether results in denial of equality of opportunity to scheduled
castes/scheduled tribes candidates. 0

Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch Rules, 1951,
as adapted by the State of Haryana, lays down that uo candidate shall
be considered to have qualified in the examination unless he obains at
least 55% marks in the aggregate of all papers, including the viva-voce
test. E

The petitioners assailed the said provision on the ground that
""-- fixation of 55% marks has resulted in denial of equality of opportunity
to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes segments of the community
vis-a-vis general candidates for detennining their suitability and/or eligi-
bility for appointment in the judicial branch of the Haryana Civil F
Services in the absence of lower percentage having been prescribed for
f them as in other States.

Disposing of the writ petition and the appeal, the Court,

HELD: J. Public services and public employment do not exist for G
providing jobs in terms of equality or otherwise to all. Only public
services and public employment must serve public purpose and nothing
that hampers or impairs the efficiency or efficacy of public services
should be permitted in ensuring conditions of constitutional equality.
These should be done objectively, rationally and reasonably.
H

329
330 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

2. Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes for reasons historical or
A
otherwise, are unequal with the general members of the community in
respect of ability and qualification for public employment. They are
unable to compete in terms of absolute equality with the members of
other communities or grou_ps in the society. Hence, in order to make
them compete on conditions of equality with others in respect of jobs and
B employments of the State certain relaxations and other factors ensuring
equality are imperative. Our Constitution so enjoins it. Article 38 of the
Constitution read with Article 14, 15 and 16 so mandates it. [332D-E; C]

3. In the instant ,case, high efficiency is required because the
recruitment is in the judicial branch, that is to say, for prospective
c judicial officers who will be in charge of administration of justice in the
country. But at the same time, if possible, in order to ensure that there
is equality of opportunity, a percentage should be fixed which without,
in any way, compromising with the efficiency required for the job
which will be attainable by backward communities, that is to say,
scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. Unless such a percentage is fixed _.A.
'
a
D on the aforesaid basis and percentage is fixed for qualification which
would normally be unattainable by the scheduled castes and scheduled
tribes determined on an objective basis, it would not he possible to
ensure equality of opportunity. [333D-F]

4.1 The Government is directed to make a conscious decision
E objectively before the !lext selections take place, and determine a
minimum percentage of marks consistent with efficiency and the need
for ensuring equality of opportunity to scheduled castes and scheduled
tribes. !334Br

4.2 The Government should also consider whether further re-
f laxation in age in favour of schedu1ed castes and scheduled tribes can he
made; and if so, to what extent without hampering efficiency of the
administration. This should also he considered before the next selec-
tions for appointment to the post are made. [334C] ...... -
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. fl47
G of 1988.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)

WITH

H Civil Appeal No. 1782 of 1990.
R.B. SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA [MUKHARJI, J.] 331

From the Judgment and Order dated 5.6.1987 of the Punjab and
A
HaryanaHighCourtin C.W.P. No. 1313of 19Mo

R. Venkataramani, Mahabir Singh, M.S. Ganesh and C.M.
Nayar for the Appearing Parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ .. The petitioners are law graduates.
They state that they belong to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
segments of the community. They are seeking enforcement of the right
to equality of opportunity in the matter of appointment to posts in the
subordinate judiciary in the State of Haryana. The State of Haryana
has reserved 20% of the posts in the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial c
Branch) for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. It is the case of
-..__ . petitioners that though 20% of the posts in the Haryana Civil Service
(Judicial Branch) have been reserved for scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes, the strength of the appointments made since 1969
onwards reveals that hardly 8% of the total posts i.e., 40 to 45% only D
of the cadre strength have been allotted ·to the scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes. The petitioners contend that in other States of India
different percentages of marks have been prescribed for scheduled
castes, scheduled tribes and general candidates for determining their
suitability and/or eligibility for appointment. But in Haryana, they
contend, minimum marks have been prescribed as 55% for all E
categories of candidates, namely, scheduled castes, scheduled tribes
and general candidates.

t In this connection, it may be appropriate to refer to the fact that
under the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules framed in
exercise of powers conferred by Article 234 read with proviso to Arti- F
cle 309 of the Constitution of India, rules have been framed and are
prevalent. Part 'C' of the rules deals with the rules and instructions for
the examination of the candidates for admission to the judicial branch
of the Haryana Civil Service. Part 'C' of the said rules was brought into
force by the Haryana Adaptation Laws (State and concurrent subjects)
Order, 1968. Rules 7 and 8 of the said rules, inter alia, provides as G
follows:

"7. No candidate shall be called for the viva-voce test
unless he obtains-at least 45% of marks in the aggregate in
all the written papers and 33% marks in the language
paper. Hindi (in Devanagri script). H
332 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990] 2 S.C.R.

8. No candidate shall be considered to have qualified in
A
the examination unless he obtains at least 55 per cent
marks in the aggregate of all papers including the viva-voce
. test."

It is the case of the petitioners that fixation of the 1standard of
B marks which the petitioners d.escribe as high standard, has resulted in
denial of opportunity to the scheduled easies and scheduled tribes thus
amounting to denial of equality of opportunity in the jobs which, the
petitioners contend, the State otherwise sought to achieve and ought
to achieve in favour of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

We are of the opinion that equality of opportunity should be
c striven for and ensured in public employment. Steps should be taken
to see where unequals are competing, conditions must be created by
relaxation or otherwise so that unequals compete in terms of equality
with others in respect of jobs and employments of the State. Our
Constitution so enjoins it. Article 38 of the Constitution read with
D Articles 14, 15 and 16 so mandates it. In order, therefore, to give those
who arc unequals, and it is accepted that scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes for reasons historical or otherwise, are unequal with
the general members of the community in respect of ability and qualifi-
cation for public employment. Hence, in order to make the unequals
compete on conditions of equality certain rel~xations and other factors
E ensuring equality are imperative. Those groups or segments of society
which are by reasons of history or otherwise unable to compete in
terms of absolute equality with the members of other communities or
groups in the society, should be ensured and assured chances of com-
peting in terms of equality. They must be helped to compete equally
but it is important to emphasise that equality of opportunity is sought
F to be achieved for the public services or employment. The efficacy and
efficiency of that service is of prime considerationc Equality must be
there for all to compete for the public services. Public services and
public employment do not exist for providing jobs in terms of equality
or otherwise to all. Only public services and public employment must
serve public purpose and nothing that hampers or impairs the effi-
G ciency or efficacy of public services cannot and should not be permit-
ted in ensuring conditions of constitutional equality. These should be
done objectively, rationally and reasonably . As is often said, it may be
that need to ensure equality for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
should not be surrendered on the facile and value based perception of
efficiency. Yet efficiency must be ensured. Real equality must be
accorde_d"
R.B. SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA [MUKHARJI, J.) 333

As mentioned hereinbefore, the contention of the petitioners is
that 55% marks in aggregate in all papers including viva voce test A
constitute rather a high standard for qualification and eligibility. They
contend that for most of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe aspi-
rants for the job it is difficult to achieve that ~tandard. It is said that in
other parts of this vast land of ours the standard is not as high as that.
Sri Venkatramani, advocate for the petitioners, contended that in B
other States on an all-India basis such a higi) standard of marks is not
envisaged. Sri Mahabir Singh, learned advocate appearing for the
-y· State of Haryana and Sri C.M. Nayar, learned advocate for the Public
°' Service Commission contend that it must be presumed that the
minimum percentage desirable for the purpose of efficiency has been
prescribed. It was further submitted by Sri Nayar that in respect of
candidates other than scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, normally c
those obtaining far higher than 55% marks become eligible for consi-
deration. That may or may not be so but what is required is that we
...,.,.__ must ensure efficiency in administration, We must, therefore, objec-
tively, rationally and by a conscious process-conscious in the sense by
application of mind to the relevant factors arrive at a percen(age which D
should be considered to be a minimum one in order to ensure the
efficiency of the administration. We are conscious that high efficiency
is required because the recruitment is in the judicial branch, that is to
say, for prospective judicial officers who will be in charge of administ-
ration of justice in the country. But at the same time, if possible, in
...._ _ order to ensure that there is equality of opportunity, a percentage E
should be fixed which without, in any way, compromising ·with the
efficiency required for the job which will be attainable by backward
communities, that is to say, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.
V nless such a percentage is fixed on the aforesaid basis and a
~ percentage is fixed for qualification which would normally be unattain-
able by the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes determined on an F
objective basis, it would not be possible to ensure equality of
• ~ opportunit)'. Both S/Sri Mahabir Singh and Nayar have urged that the
minimum must be presumed to have been so fixed in the Haryana
Service. However, that fact is not apparent and there is nothing on
record to indicate that this percentage was fixed deliberately on an
analysis and careful examination and determination on the lines and G
the principles indicated above .

.- f In that view of the matter, in our opinion, in the interest of
justice and our constitutional mandates and in the light of the effi-
ciency of the services and with a view to create a sense of justice, it is
necessary for the Government concerned to consider this question as H
334 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990] 2 S.C.R.

A to what should be the minimum percentage (Jf marks necessary for the
administration. We direct that the Governnient will make a conscious
decision objectively before the next selections for the post in Haryana
Judicial Service take place, and determine a minimum percentage of
marks consistent with efficiency and the need for ensuring equality of
opportunity to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.
B
It was also contended by Sri Venkataramani that some of the
candidates belonging to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes have
become averaged, therefore, the Government should also consider
whether further relaxation in age in favour of scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes can be made; and if so,. to what extent without
c hampering efficiency of the administration. This should also be con-
sidered before the next. selections for appointment to the post are
made.

In the· aforesaid light, special leave is granted in civil appeal
No. 15,000/88 and the judgment and order of the High Court of
D Punjab & Haryana, dated 5th June, 1987 are modified to the extent
indicated above. The writ petition and the appeals are disposed of
accordingly without any order as to costs.

P.S.S. Petition disposed of.

•