Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Jan 28: The Supreme Court on Friday delivered the judgment in the issue relating to reservation in promotions. Centre and States had urged the Supreme Court to settle the confusion regarding the norms for reservation in promotions saying that several appointments have been stalled due to ambiguities.
The apex court ruled that it cannot set any criteria for establishing the adequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) communities in services for which reservation in promotion is being provided.
Reservation in promotion: Supreme Court says state governments ought to collect quantifiable data before granting reservation in promotion to SC/ST employees; further added that it cannot lay down new yardstick after Constitution bench decisions
— ANI (@ANI) January 28, 2022
The concerned State government is required to gather such data as laid forth in the Supreme Court’s 2006 ruling, according to a bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, and BR Gavai.
“We have held we cannot lay down any yardstick to determine inadequacy of representation. State is obligated to collect quantifiable data regarding SC/ST representation. We have left it to state to assess yardstick to determine inadequacy of representation of SC/ST,” the Court held.
The Court further stated that the term “cadre” should be used as unit for collection for quantifiable data.
Collection of quantifiable data is mandatory apart from assessment of inadequacy of representation after a periodic review is done, the Court added.
In short, the court cannot lay down yardstick for determining adequacy of representation. State has to collect quantifiable data regarding SC/ST representation in services. ‘Cadre’ should be considered as unit for collection for quantifiable data.
Background of the case
In 2006, in M. Nagaraj vs Union of India, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had upheld the constitutional validity of the 85th Constitutional Amendments Acts providing for reservation in promotion. The Apex Court in Nagaraj had laid down conditionalities such as collection of data on the inadequacy of representation, the overall effect on the efficiency on administration and removing creamy layers while considering reservations in promotions.
In 2018, a 5-judge Bench in Jarnail Singh answered the reference holding the the 2006 judgment in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India case to be wrong to the extent it had stated that quantifiable data showing backwardness of SC/STs was necessary for giving them reservation in promotions. With this clarification, the 5-judge bench turned down the plea to refer Nagaraj decision to a 7-judge bench.
The present batch of 144 pleas were filed by the Central Government and various state governments urging the Supreme Court to urgently hear the issues relating to reservation in promotions as several appointments have been stalled due to the ambiguities in the norms for applying reservation in promotions.
