January 30, 2022

No 'Yardstick' for reservation in promotions.

~Preet

Refusing to ease the conditions it had previously prescribed to reserve promotions for Scheduled Actors and Scheduled Tribes, the Supreme Court said Friday it was "unable to establish any There are no criteria for determining their lack of "representation" in public employment.
The Bench of Judges L Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai indicates that the court, even in the past, has since declined to set out the criteria and assigned the states to determine the factors involved to decide on appropriate representation, depending on the ad placements in question.

Recalling the point, the administrator argued that “establishing criteria to determine underrepresentation would lead to a reduction in decision-making power for state governments. In addition, prevailing local conditions, which may need to be taken into account, may not be uniform”.

Pointed out that the court in ruling No. -2006 in M Nagaraj v Union of India ``clarified that the effect of legislation by state governments providing for reservations in promotions will be determined on a case-by-case basis for the purpose of determining whether underrepresentation of inadequacy is supported by quantitative data," said the drafter" therefore, we assume that there is no such criterion. may be established by this Court to determine the adequacy of SC and ST representation in the advertisement of slots for the purpose of providing reservation services”

The court said "before offering bookings in promotions to an executive, the state is required to collect quantifiable data on the underrepresentation of SCs and STs." " but crawling" cannot be done with reference to the entire service or 'class'/'group', but it must be associated with the level/category of the post for which the ad is requested .
Makes no sense if data says that a review of the data collected is needed, she says the review time should be “reasonable”.

The Chairman also said Nagaraj's ruling "will take effect in the future."

The ruling was made on appeal from the Center and from the states that said they were unable to conduct many promotions due to the lack of promotion. ambiguity in applying the reservation standards and asking the court for clarification . In the Nagaraj case, a bench of five Constitutional Justices upheld the constitutional amendments under which Sections 16 (4A) and 16 ( 4B) have been included, stating that they comply with Article 16(4) and do not change its structure.

Section 16 (4A) empowers the state to provide promotional bookings to SC/ST agents if they believe they are underrepresented in services and (4B) allows the state to forward SC/ST quotas ST has not taken from a particular year without confusing it with the regular holiday in the year it is carried over.

obligation to spend SC/ST for promotions. However, if it wants to follow through on its decision and make such regulation, the state must collect quantitative data that shows class backwardness and insufficient representation of that class in making decisions. employment in addition to complying with section 335. It is provided that even where the State has compelling reasons, as stated above, the State must ensure that the provision of its reserves does not result in an excess. exceed the 50% cap or remove the ice cream or extend the reserve indefinitely,” the court said.

Comments