DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

HC upholds quota in promotion for SCs in Group A & B posts

Directs exclusion of creamy layer
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Representational photo
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the validity of the Haryana Government’s October 7, 2023, instructions, providing 20 per cent reservation for Scheduled Castes in promotional posts of Group A and B. The court, however, has held that employees belonging to the creamy layer must be excluded from the benefit.

Disposing of a bunch of petitions challenging the instructions, Justice Jagmohan Bansal ruled that the State had fulfilled the constitutional preconditions before providing for reservation in promotions. The court found that quantifiable data had been collected, demonstrating inadequate representation of SCs in the promotional posts of Group A and B.

The petitioners had, among other things, contended that the instructions were liable to be set aside as the State had failed to exclude the creamy layer among SCs while providing reservation in promotion for Group A and B posts.

Advertisement

The State had, on the other hand, defended its move by asserting that despite 20 per cent reservation in direct recruitment to Group A and B posts, SC representation remained deficient since most such positions were filled through promotion, and regular direct recruitment had not taken place.

After hearing rival contentions, Justice Bansal was of the view the State’s policy was backed by empirical data and a conscious policy decision. The court also took into consideration concerns over the efficiency of administration, as mandated by Article 335.

Advertisement

The Bench held that no promotion would take place unless the candidate met essential qualifications and eligibility conditions. “If a person is not eligible for promotion, he is not going to be promoted or would be demoted if he does not comply with the prescribed conditions,” Justice Bansal asserted, ruling out any compromise in administrative efficiency due to the reservation policy.

The Bench added that the State by collecting quantifiable data had complied with requirement of Article 16(4A) of the Constitution and the mandate of the Constitution Bench judgments.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper