Reservation in promotion
Centre urges SC to provide SC/ST quota in promotions
A-G SUBMITTED that there was no need for further quantifiable data for showing backwardness so as to provide reservations for promotions.
HE SAID the reservation was given to SC and ST communities to right a wrong they suffered for more than 1,000 years.
Ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, the government on Friday pleaded in the Supreme Court for providing a quota in promotions for SC/ST employees in government jobs and sought reconsideration of its 2006 verdict that rejected such reservations in promotions.
Attorney-general K.K. Venugopal urged a Constitution Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Nariman, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Indu Malhotra to revisit the Nagaraj verdict that had imposed three conditions — identification of backwardness, compelling reasons and inadequate representation — for grant of quota for SC/ST in promotions.
The A-G referred to the conditions in the Nagaraj ruling and said it was a “situation of impossibility” to comply in every case with the conditions set in that judgement. When the CJI asked the A-G on adequacy of reservation, he said in promotions too the SC/ST should together account for 23 out of every 100 promotions in a year. Affirmative action would otherwise remain an illusion.
He said there was no need for testing the backwardness of SC/ST employees while granting promotions as the Supreme Court itself in the Indra Sawhney case in 1992 had said the test of backwardness does not apply to SC/STs as they are presumed to be backward.
He said only this quantum would satisfy the adequacy of their representation.
Ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, the government on Friday pleaded in the Supreme Court for providing a quota in promotions for SC/ST employees in government jobs and sought reconsideration of its 2006 verdict that rejected such reservations in promotions.
When the CJI wanted to know why did the states, for all this time, not prepare quantifiable data to decide the adequacy/inadequacy of representation of SC/STs in a cadre of government service, the A-G replied: “Why? Because people die, retire. The data keeps fluctuating. Filling up of vacancies is a dynamic, continuous process.”
He said there had to be a presumption of backwardness for SC/STs and the 2006 judgment should not have stipulated satisfaction about backwardness in providing reservation in promotions.
The A-G submitted that there was no need for further quantifiable data for showing backwardness. He told the court the community as a whole had been facing discrimination from upper castes and the intent of giving reservation in promotions to SC/STs was to provide affirmative action for a socially disadvantaged group. He said the Nagraj judgment was unclear on what it meant by quantifiable data and how it should be determined. “What is inadequacy? How is it determined? Your Lordships have to decide,” Mr Venugopal said.
He pointed out that reservation had been given to SC/ST communities to right a wrong they suffered for more than 1,000 years. Atrocities on them happen even today, he added. The A-G pitched for overturning the Nagaraj ruling by seven judges, which he said would meet the ends of justice for SC/STs.