INDER JYOTI CHAUHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by medium of this writ petition has questioned the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh on 12.11.2010 whereby it quashed the order dated 4.9.2006 whereunder the petitioner had been held entitled to the benefit of reservation from the date of joining with a condition that in the recruitment roster she would not be entitled to consume the reservation point for initial appointment.

(2.) IT appears that the petitioner had applied for post of Lower Division Clerk as general category candidate and this fact was recorded in her service book. Some time later, the petitioner applied for change of category from general category to Scheduled Caste on the ground that she could not submit her certificate earlier as she had lost the same. The competent authority allowed the change of category (from General to Reserved) vide order dated 20.6.2004 and it was subsequently, vide letter dated 4.9.2006 that the competent authority held the petitioner "is entitled to the benefits of reservation from the date of joining but in the recruitment roster she shall not consume the reserved point for initial appointment."

(3.) NOTABLY the 5th respondent did not challenge the change of category before the Tribunal but was only aggrieved by the grant of benefit in favour of petitioner from "the date of her entry into service". He maintained that since the petitioner had been appointed as Lower Division Clerk in general/open category, she could not now take U -turn and claimed the benefit of reservation from the date of her appointment as she was estopped by own act and conduct. It was further claimed that in case such benefit is granted, the same would be unconstitutional being contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It was also contended that granting of benefit to the petitioner after 20 years especially when 5th respondent had already been promoted several times would amount to take away the vested right already accrued in his favour. Lastly, it was contended that the petitioner had made a false declaration at the time of entry into service and, therefore, was not entitled to the benefit of reservation.