1991 (10) TMI 326 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court upholds reservations for SC/ST in promotions, citing administrative instructions, circular compliance

Comptroller & Auditor General of India and Ors. Versus Mohan Lal Mehrotra and Ors.

The Supreme Court overturned the High Court's decision regarding reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions. The Court held that ... - Issues Involved:1. Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions.2. Validity of administrative instructions versus statutory rules.3. Compliance with Article 148(5) of the Constitution.Detailed Analysis:1. Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Promotions:The primary issue was whether the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) could enforce a circular dated January 25, 1973, which mandated reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in promotions to the post of Accounts Officers. The petitioners, who were senior to the respondents belonging to SC/ST, challenged the circular on the grounds that the relevant statutory rules did not provide for such reservations. The High Court had ruled that the circular could not be enforced as it was not part of the statutory rules.2. Validity of Administrative Instructions Versus Statutory Rules:The High Court held that the administrative instructions contained in the circular could not supplement or alter the statutory rules, which were silent on the subject of reservations. The rules, known as the 'Indian Audit & Accounts Department (Administrative Officers, Assistant Accounts Officers and Assistant Audit Officers) Recruitment Rules, 1963,' did not include provisions for reservations for SC/ST in promotions. The High Court relied on precedents from the Madras High Court and the Orissa High Court to support its decision that administrative instructions could not override statutory rules.3. Compliance with Article 148(5) of the Constitution:The High Court also examined whether the circular was issued in compliance with Article 148(5) of the Constitution, which requires rules affecting service conditions to be made by the President after consultation with the CAG. The High Court concluded that the circular did not meet this requirement, as it was not issued in the name of the President and lacked evidence of being based on a decision by the President.Supreme Court's Judgment:The Supreme Court overturned the High Court's decision, addressing each issue as follows:1. Reservation for SC/ST in Promotions:The Supreme Court held that the rules were silent on the subject of reservations and thus could be supplemented by administrative instructions. The Court cited precedents where similar circulars issued by the Railway Board were upheld to implement the Central Government's reservation policy.2. Validity of Administrative Instructions:The Supreme Court stated that administrative orders could be issued to supplement statutory rules, provided they did not contravene them. The circular in question was deemed to be in line with the declared policy of reservation and thus valid.3. Compliance with Article 148(5):The Supreme Court acknowledged that while the circular should ideally have been issued in the name of the President, the lack of this formality did not invalidate it. There was proper consultation between the Government and the CAG, and the circular was in accordance with the Government's policy on reservations. Therefore, the circular was held to be valid and enforceable.Conclusion:The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, allowing the appeal and upholding the validity of the impugned circular. The authorities were directed to consider the reservations while making promotions under the existing rules. No order as to costs was made.This comprehensive analysis preserves the legal terminology and significant phrases from the original text while providing a detailed understanding of the judgment.