TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority to Government Servants Promoted on the Basis of Reservation Act, 2018 was constitutionally valid and had cured the basis of the earlier invalidation; (ii) whether the reservation of the Bill for the consideration of the President and the President's assent were constitutionally infirm; (iii) whether the challenge based on creamy layer, adequacy of representation, administrative efficiency, and retrospectivity could invalidate the Act.
Issue (i): Whether the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority to Government Servants Promoted on the Basis of Reservation Act, 2018 was constitutionally valid and had cured the basis of the earlier invalidation.
Analysis: The earlier invalidation had rested on the absence of quantifiable data showing inadequacy of representation, backwardness, and impact on administrative efficiency as required by the controlling constitutional doctrine governing reservations in promotion. After that decision, the State constituted an expert committee, collected and analysed data, and enacted the 2018 legislation on that foundation. A validating law is permissible if it removes the basis of the earlier invalidity rather than merely overruling the judicial decision by declaration. The legislative competence to enact retrospectively and to cure the defect was therefore upheld.
Conclusion: The Act was held to be constitutionally valid and the basis of the earlier invalidation was treated as cured.
Issue (ii): Whether the reservation of the Bill for the consideration of the President and the President's assent were constitutionally infirm.
Analysis: The Governor's power under Article 200 is discretionary and may be exercised where there is a genuine constitutional doubt. The constitutional scheme does not confine reservation only to cases of repugnancy, and the validity of the President's assent is not open to judicial scrutiny. Once the Bill was reserved and the President assented, the requirements of Article 201 stood satisfied.
Conclusion: The reservation of the Bill and the President's assent were upheld as valid.
Issue (iii): Whether the challenge based on creamy layer, adequacy of representation, administrative efficiency, and retrospectivity could invalidate the Act.
Analysis: The Court held that the creamy layer concept had no application to the grant of consequential seniority in the context of promotion under Article 16(4A). It also held that the State's data exercise was a permissible method of assessing adequacy of representation and that judicial review must remain limited when an expert committee has collected relevant and representative material. The retrospective protection of consequential seniority from 1978 was also held not to be arbitrary, particularly in light of the earlier protection given to pre-1996 promotions and the validating purpose of the legislation.
Conclusion: The additional constitutional challenges were rejected.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Reservation Act 2018 failed in substance, and the legislation was upheld as a valid exercise of the enabling power concerning reservation in promotion with consequential seniority.
Ratio Decidendi: A legislature may enact a validating law with retrospective effect to cure the defect found in an earlier statute, and such a law will be sustained if it removes the basis of invalidity while remaining within constitutional limits; in reservation-in-promotion matters, the State's expert data assessment is subject only to limited judicial review.
TaxTMI 
