R.B. RAI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Validity, rather, workability of Madhya Pradesh Public Services (Promotion) Rules, 2002 (for short 'Rules of 2002') on the anvil of the law laid down in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212, is being questioned vide present batch of writ petitions.

(2.) These Rules of 2002, as is evident, are brought in vogue in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 read with Article 16 and 335 of the Constitution of India, relates to determination of the basis for promotion in public services and posts and also, the reservation in promotion in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

(3.) Shri R.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel, who led the arguments on behalf of the petitioners, has to submit that, though Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B) of the Constitution of India enables the State to make provisions facilitating reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotion but the same being enabling provisions, the State is under the constitutional obligation to fulfil the stipulations contained in clauses (4A) and (4B) of Article 16 and Article 335 of the Constitution and as interpreted vide judicial pronouncement by the Constitutional Bench in M. Nagaraj (supra). And, as mandated in Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited v. Rajesh Kumar (2012) 7 SCC 1 that, even in case of Rules of 2002, though brought in vogue at pre M. Nagaraj (supra) stage, fresh exercise of collecting quantifiable data justifying reservation in terms of parameters of efficiency, backwardness and inadequacy of representation in particular class or classes of posts having not taken recourse to, and the Rules of 2002 being not in consonance with the provisions of clauses (4A) and (4B) of Article 16 read with Article 335 of the Constitution has rendered itself unworkable and therefore, deserves to be declared ultra vires Constitution. This is the neat and precise submissions on behalf of the petitioners.