Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
DHANNA RAM
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/04/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (5) 70 1996 SCALE (4)228
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Leave granted. Heard learned counsel on both sides.
This appeal by special leave arises from the Order of
the Central Administrative Tribunal at Chandigarh made in
O.A. No.308 of 1994 on March 21, 1995. Though the Tribunal
has dismissed the O.A. on the ground of delay, we have
examined the matter on merits. It is now clear from the
record placed by the respondents that as a result of
selection, list was prepared on April 4, 1990 for
appointment as Goods Clerks and Coaching Clerks from among
the class IV employees in the order of merit from the quota
reserved for class IV employees. Out of them they also made
reservation to the members of the Scheduled Castes. The
appellant belongs to the Scheduled Castes. Candidates at
item Nos.17 and 32 of the list also belong to the Scheduled
Castes and were superior in the order of merit; they were
selected on the general standard to the roster point as
against those who were selected in the reserved quota with
relaxed standards. The appellant stands at No.2 while one
Sarvan Kumar stands at No. 1 of the list of reserved quota.
It is true that in the communication sent to the appellant
it was mentioned that he was selected on general standards.
It would appear that subsequently, they realized the mistake
and corrected the same and put him in the order of merit as
a candidate for the reserved quota. Since there was no
vacancy existing for reserved quota, he could not be
appointed. Under those circumstances we cannot give any
direction for making his appointment. Since the list has
already expired by efflux of time, the directions sought for
appointment in the future vacancies cannot be given. But
this order does not preclude him from consideration for
future promotions in any of the vacancies that would arise
subsequent to the earlier selection.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2