JAI KISHORE DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVI S. Dhavan, CJ -There seems to be an endless explanation being offered on behalf of the State respondent even after the aspect is absolutely clear that but for certain judgments of the Supreme Court, Article 16 (4 -A) would have taken effect.

(2.) IN this context at the outset it may be placed on record that the Constitution itself while taking the amendments by the 77th Amendment Act, 1995 declared that Sub Clause 4 -A will take effect from 17.6.1995. In the same context, the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter relating to R.K. Sabharwal and others v. The State of Punjab and others (1995)2 Supreme Court Cases 745 in no uncertain terms declared in paragraph 11 ''we, however, direct that the interpretation given by us to the working of the roster and our findings on this point shall be operative prospectively. '' The date of the judgment is 10.2.1995.

(3.) THE last promotion which was received by the appellants (Messers Jaikishore Das and Balrup Das) was in 1988. Thus, whether prior from the date when the constitutional amendment took effect or from the effect of the judgment in Re. Sabharwal case (supra), whichever, to consider promotion for the two appellants or any similarly situated incumbent is a matter which has yet to be taken up as an exercise. On the other hand this is not to be confused with the exercise of balancing the rights in the context of the catch -up rule in Re. Ajit Singh and others (II) case (supra). These two aspects are distinct from each other.