Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 4202 of 2003
PETITIONER:
A.P. Public Service Commission
RESPONDENT:
K. Sudharshan Reddy and Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/07/2006
BENCH:
Dr. AR. Lakshmanan & Altamas Kabir
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
ALTAMAS KABIR, J.
Pursuant to an advertisement No. 2/83 published by it, the Andhra Pradesh
Public Service Commission conducted recruitment to Group-II (A) Services
and upon completion of the process of selection, the selected candidates
were appointed in 1985 itself. In keeping with GOMS No. 502 dated 26th
June, 1976, 5% weightage marks were awarded to candidates who had obtained
their basic qualifications through Telugu medium. The same was challenged
before the Andhra Pradesh High Court by Non-Telugu Medium candidates in a
Writ Petition, being No. 2041/1981, which was allowed by the learned Single
Judge by his judgment dated 7th June, 1981. By the said judgment and order
the learned Single Judge quashed the aforesaid Government Order on the
ground that it was discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution.
Two Writ Appeals were filed from the order of the learned Single Judge, one
by the State of Andhra Pradesh and the other by the Telugu Medium
candidates. Both the Writ Appeals were heard analogously by a Division
Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which by its judgment and order
dated 15th September, 1981 allowed the Writ Appeals and upheld the
Government Orders whereby 5 % weightage in total marks was given to Telugu
Medium candidates, upon holding that the same did not violate Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Writ Petition filed by the
Non-Telugu Medium Candidates was dismissed. The same resulted in the filing
of Civil Appeal No.2914/1981 (V.N. Sunanda Reddy and Ors. v. State of
Andhra Pradesh and Ors.) in this Court. Subsequently, the State of Andhra
Pradesh issued a more comprehensive Government Order No.603 dated 18th
November, 1981 and extended 5 % weightage to all Telugu Medium Students who
were candidates for recruitment by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service
Commission to any service in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The statutory
rules framed in terms of the said Government Order were once again
challenged by Non-Telugu Medium candidates before the Andhra Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad. The Tribunal by its order dated 18th
January, 1994, allowed the said application filed by the Non-Telugu Medium
candidates upon holding as was done in the earlier matter, that the said
Government Order was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
As will be apparent, the view taken by the Tribunal was contrary to the
decision of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and it
resulted in a Special Leave Petition being (Civil) No. 6395/1994 filed by
the Telugu Medium candidates and by the State of Andhra Pradesh by way of
Special Leave Petition c No. 13446/1994. As the question involved in both
the matters was the same, they were taken up together for hearing by this
Court and were disposed of by a common judgment dated 25th January, 1995.
Although, at the time of the hearing of the appeals, it was sought to be
urged on behalf of the State that the weightage had been given in the
interest of the State to enable it to recruit persons who are better
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5
acquainted with Telugu language, which was the official language of the
State, such a stand was rejected and it was held that the Division Bench of
the Andhra Pradesh High Court was not right when it accepted such view.
This Court held further that the Division Bench was not justified in
upsetting the views expressed by the learned Single Judge.
While disposing of the said appeals, this Court took note of a submission
made on behalf of Telugu Medium students that in the event the weightage
given to them in recruitment was found to be faulty, those Telugu Medium
candidates who had already been appointed on the basis of such weightage
should not be disturbed and it was also submitted that those Telugu Medium
students whose appointments could not be made on account of pendency of the
proceedings should be given one further chance to compete for future
recruitment in the post in question and for that purpose suitable age
relaxation may be made in their case. Finding such submission to be
reasonable, this Court observed and directed as follows:-
"...In our view this request is quite reasonable and deserves to be
granted. We, therefore, direct that despite our finding that 5 percent
weightage given to the Telugu medium graduates in the present case is
violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution, those Telugu medium
graduates who have already been appointed on the strength of such weightage
and who are working on their concerned posts should not be disturbed and
their appointments will not be adversely affected by the present judgment.
On the other hand, those Telugu medium graduates who have been selected on
the strength of the weightage but to whom actual appointments have not been
given on account of pendency of the present proceedings should be given a
chance to compete for such posts as and when future recruitment to such
posts is resorted to and for that purpose only once suitable age relaxation
may be given to them in case they are otherwise found suitable on merits to
be appointed in such future direct recruitment to such posts. In other
words, only on account of the fact that they have become age barred, they
should not be denied appointments on the strength of their meritorious
performance. This will be by way of only one time concession about age
relaxation."
Consequently, Civil Appeal No. 2914/1981 was allowed, the judgment and
order of the Division Bench was set aside and the decision of the learned
Single Judge was restored and the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP c Nos.
6395 & 13446/1994 were dismissed and the judgment and order of the Andhra
Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad in O.A.No. 2142/1993 was
confirmed.
Despite the views expressed by this Court in the above appeals, the matter
was not allowed to rest and one K. Sudharshan Reddy, the respondent No.1
before us in Civil Appeal No.4202/203 and Sri Y.T. Naidu, who is respondent
No.1 before us in Civil Appeal No.4201/2003, filed separate applications
before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, being O.A.No.6141/1995
and O.A.No.2470/2001, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act,
1985, complaining that the respondents had acted in a manner contrary to
law by giving the advantage of weightage marks while preparing the merit
list for preparation of the seniority list in view of the aforesaid
judgment of this Court. It was the contention of the said applicants that
the direction that the services of those Telugu Medium candidates who had
been appointed on account of the weightage given should not be disturbed,
did not include any condition that such candidates were to be given the
benefit of weightage of 5% of the total marks also for the purpose of
computing seniority. In other words, it was sought to be contended that the
protection given by the aforesaid judgment of this Court to Telugu Medium
students, who had already been selected with the benefit of weightage, was
only to the extent of their appointment and that for their ranking in the
merit list, the additional 5% marks could not be counted.
The said argument advanced on behalf of the said two respondents found
favour with the Tribunal which was persuaded to hold that the protection
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5
afforded to the Telugu Medium candidates did not extend to the counting of
such weightage for the purpose of determining seniority in the cadre. The
learned Tribunal, therefore, directed the Government to take follow up
action to reduce the weightage marks given to the Telugu Medium candidates
and to prepare the new ranking list and to fix the seniority on the basis
thereof.
Both the Original Applications were disposed of by the Tribunal by its
aforesaid judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2001, which was challenged
before the Andhra Pradesh High Court by way of Writ Petitions Nos.
16321/1001 and 16283/2001. Both the Writ Petitions were dismissed by
identical orders with the observation that the Tribunal had merely followed
the judgment of this Court and the impugned order did not, therefore,
suffer from any legal infirmity. These two appeals before us have been
filed by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission against the orders
passed in the said Writ Petitions and since they involve common questions
of law and fact, the same have been taken up together for hearing and
disposal.
Appearing for the appellant-Commission, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior
advocate, took us through the relevant portions of the directions given by
this Court which have been quoted hereinbefore and tried to explain the
true meaning and purport thereof, which according to him, had been
completely misunderstood both by the Tribunal, as also the Andhra Pradesh
High Court. Mr. Kumar emphasized on the use of the expression "those Telugu
Medium Graduates who have already been appointed on the strength of such
weightage and who are working on their concerned posts should not be
disturbed and their appointments will not be adversely affected by the
present judgment." (underlining by us). He emphasized that the said
direction could be broken up into three parts in order to understand and
appreciate their true meaning and purport. It was submitted that this Court
included in the scope of its order Telugu Medium candidates who had already
been appointed on the strength of the weightage given. Secondly, those
persons who were working on their concerned posts should not be disturbed
and thirdly their appointments were not to be adversely affected. Mr. Kumar
added that a conscious distinction had been made by the Court in respect of
those Telugu Medium graduates who had been selected on the strength of the
weightage but to whom actual appointments had not been given. Mr. Kumar
submitted that in their case the Court directed that they should be given a
chance to compete for such posts when future recruitment to such posts was
required and for that purpose only once suitable age relaxation could be
given to them in case they were otherwise found suitable on merit to be
appointed in future to such posts.
In addition to his aforesaid submission on the merits of the views
expressed by the Tribunal and the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High
Court, Mr. Kumar also urged that if the judgment and order of the Tribunal
and the High Court were allowed to stand, it would result in unsettling of
the entire seniority position which prevailed in 1981 in different services
through out the State and the same would lead to a chaotic situation. It
was submitted that such an action could hardly be undertaken at such a
distant point of time.
In support of his said submission, Mr. Kumar referred to the decision of
this Court in the case of Prabodh Verma and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh
and Ors., [1984] 4 SCC 251, wherein in paragraph 28 such a scenario has
been considered, discussed and dilated upon.
Reference was also made to a decision of this Court in the case of Arun
Tewari and Ors. v. Zila Mansavi Shikshak Sangh and Ors., [1998] 2 SCC 332,
wherein with reference to the aforesaid case, similar views have been
expressed.
Mr. M.N. Rao, learned senior advocate, who appeared for the respondent No.
1 in both the matters, on the other hand, strongly supported the view
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5
expressed by the Tribunal.
Mr. Rao submitted that having held that the Government Orders granting
weightage of 5% marks to Telugu Medium candidates was violative of Articles
14 and 16 of the Constitution, it could never have been the intention of
this Court to perpetuate such arbitrariness and all that was protected by
this Court’s order were the appointments which had been made in favour of
such Telugu Medium candidates who had been given the benefit of weightage
in terms of the concerned Government Orders. According to Mr. Rao, to hold
otherwise would be to negate the very decision of this Hon’ble Court in the
earlier matter.
It was further urged that the revision of the seniority list could always
be done at any stage since all the required particulars were available in
the office of the concerned authorities.
Referring to the decision of this Court in the case of Ajit Singh and
Ors.(II) v. State of Punjab and Ors., [1999] 7 SCC 209, Mr. Rao submitted
that while discussing "the catch up role", it was observed that there
should not be any difficulty in amending the seniority list since the
seniority list at a particular level would have to be amended only when the
senior general candidates reach the said level.
Mr. Rao urged that this Court had held that such weightage was arbitrary
and that the addition of 40 marks which represented 5 % of the total
aggregate marks would give the Telugu Medium candidates, a strong advantage
over candidates from other mediums, particularly when competition was
fierce and even one mark could tilt the decision in favour of a candidate.
Having carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of the
respective parties, we are unable to agree with the submissions advanced by
Mr. Rao since in our view, after having held the impugned Government Order
to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, it was the
intention of this Court to maintain the status quo as it existed with
regard to the appointments already made where certain candidates had
already been given the benefit of weightage. We are inclined to agree with
Mr. Ranjit Kumar that the Court intended to protect not only the
appointment of such candidates but also all their service conditions, which
included their right to seniority as had accrued to them at the time of
their initial appointment. In our view, the said intention of this Court
was quite clear from the language used. If this Court had intended that the
weightage given to the concerned candidates was not to count towards their
position in the merit list, it would have said so explicitly. On the other
hand, while mentioning the fact of their appointment on the strength of
such weightage this Court went on to say that such candidates would not be
adversely affected by the judgment. In other words, the decision rendered
in the judgment would not adversely affect their existing service
conditions.
Furthermore, the question of seniority was never in question prior to the
decision of this Court in Civil Appeal No.2914/1981 decided on 25th
January, 1995.
Apart from the above, the other submission of Mr. Ranjit Kumar regarding
the difficulty of unsettling the settled position after all these years
cannot also be lightly brushed aside.
For the reasons aforesaid, the appeals must succeed and are allowed. The
judgment and orders of the Andhra Pradesh High Court appealed against are
hereby set aside along with the judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2001
passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal passed in
O.A.Nos.6141/1995 and 2470/2001.
There will be no order as to costs.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5