Punjab and Haryana High Court stays Scheduled Caste quota in promotions

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, January 15

Over a month after a single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court permitted the State of Haryana to proceed further with promotions in accordance with instructions directing reservation in promotion to Scheduled Caste (SC) employees, a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today ordered a stay.

The Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Aman Chaudhary also fixed the matter for further hearing on February 7, asserting: “In the meantime, no further promotions shall be made.” The Bench also granted the State one more opportunity to assist the court, while allowing the State counsel’s prayer.

The Single Bench had, in its order, also made it clear that the promotions in accordance with the impugned instructions dated October 7, 2023, would be subject to the decision in the writ petitions challenging the instructions, whereby the Human Resources Department had directed Haryana Government departments to grant reservation in promotions to SC employees.

The reservation was to be granted in all cadres of Group A and B posts to the extent of 20 per cent of the sanctioned posts of promotional quota. Kamaljeet Singh and other petitioners had challenged the instructions on four grounds, including the plea that the exercise to assess the inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes, was to precede the formulation of opinion by the state government to provide reservation. It was to be done for each cadre separately and not to a group of posts.

It was also contended that the power to provide reservation was with the state government and could not be delegated to the departmental promotions committee. Besides this, it was necessary to exclude the creamy SC layer before providing reservation in promotional posts and the exercise was required to meet the parameters of Article 335.

Taking up the matter, the single judge had asserted that the court at the current stage was prima facie satisfied with the State’s stand. But the issue required to be further delved into after the written statement was filed by the State and those affected.

Petitioners had challenged instructions

Petitioners had challenged the instructions on four grounds, including the plea that the exercise to assess the inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes, was to precede the formulation of opinion by the state government to provide reservation. It was to be done for each cadre separately and not to a group of posts.