B UMADEVI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question seemingly of some importance as regards applicability of the principles of reservation framed by the State in relation to the employees of the 1st respondent herein arises for consideration in this appeal. FACTS :

(2.) A recruitment notification was issued on 1-1-1997 by the 2nd respondent herein calling applications from the eligible candidates to fill up 131 posts of Assistant Engineers (Electrical). The writ petitioner-appellant herein applied pursuant to the said notification. She was not selected. Appointment letters have been issued by the 2nd respondent-Board to all 131 candidates who had been selected. A writ petition was filed questioning non-selection of the petitioner inter alia on the ground that the State in exercise of its policy in terms of Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India directed reservation of 331/3% vacancies in public service for women candidates. The said policy decision has been brought into force by reason of the Rule 22-A of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules (for short "the Rules") and thus the same is binding upon the 2nd respondent-Board.

(3.) The contention of the respondents was that the appellant herein secured 65.83% marks whereas the last candidate in OC category secured 68.19% and as such she was not selected. It was contended that having regard to the provisions contained in Sections 78-A and 79-C of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, the Board had an obligation to follow the directions of the State. Assuming, according to the respondents, that the reservation policy is applicable, the notification was issued on 1-1-1997 by which date the A.P. Regulation of Reservations for Appointments to Public Services Act, 1997 whereupon the appellant placed reliance did not come into force and, thus, there was no obligation on the part of the Board to implement the reservation. The learned single Judge arrived at a conclusion that Rule 22-A of the Rules would not automatically be applicable to the employees serving under the Board and the necessary regulations have to be issued by virtue of the power vested in it under Section 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. Mere framing of the policy of reservation, the learned single Judge held, would not ipso facto oblige the Board to implement the same. As regards applicability of Act 24 of 1997 the learned single Judge held: The appointments are initiated by way of notification for recruitment and therefore, when once the recruitment process commences prior to the Act coming into force, any appointment made in pursuance of such notification will not be covered by the Act. Rule 22-A of the Rules reads thus: Women reservation in appointments:-Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules or Special Rules or Adhoc Rules: (1) In the matter of direct recruitment to posts for which women are better suited than men, preference shall be given to women: Provided that such absolute preference to women shall not result in total exclusion of men in any category of posts. (2) In the matter of direct recruitment to posts for which women and men are equally suited, there shall be reservation to women to an extent to 33 1/3% of the posts in each category of Open Competition, Backward Classes (Group-A), Backward Classes (Group-B), Backward Classes (Group-C), Backward Classes (Group-D), Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Physically Handicapped and Ex-Servicemen quota; (3) In the matter of direct recruitment to posts which are reserved exclusively for being filled by women, they shall be filled by women only.