UNION OF INDIA Vs. GOPAL MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present three appeals have been preferred by the Union of India; two appeals viz. Civil Appeal No. 3314 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 5933 of 2010 arise out of an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (For short, the Tribunal), affirmed by the High Court of Delhi and High Court of Punjab and Haryana, directing separate zone of consideration for promotion of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates to the post of Superintendent in the Customs and Central Excise Commissionerate from the post of Inspector, whereas the Civil Appeal No. 9436 of 2010 is directed against a similar direction by the High Court of Delhi but in respect of Indo-Tibetan Border Police for promotion to the post of Assistant Commandant from the post of Subedar Major Stenographer.

(2.) For the sake of brevity, the facts are quoted from the Civil Appeal No. 3314 of 2010. The grievance of the applicants (For short, the candidates), belonging to the Scheduled Tribes, was that there is backlog of vacancies for the post of Superintendent which have not been filled up for the reason that the candidates are not available within the zone of consideration. Therefore, to fill up the 29 posts of Superintendent, it was prayed that a separate zone of consideration be created for the Scheduled Tribe candidates so that the vacancies in the cadre of Superintendent meant for them could be filled up.

(3.) The Tribunal found that the Office Memorandum dtd. 30/9/1983 which restricted the zone of consideration to five times of the posts to be illegal. Reliance was placed upon the orders passed by this Court in U.P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad SC/ST Karamchari Kalyan Sangh v. U.P. State Electricity Board and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 4026 of 1988 decided on 23/11/1994); C.D. Bhatia and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 14566 of 1995 decided on 20/10/1995); and, Basudeo Anil and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 1194 of 1992 decided on 7/9/2000) wherein the Office Memorandum dtd. 30/9/1983 restricting the zone of consideration was found to be illegal.