TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (9) TMI 345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions, eligibility etc. to sit for the Civil Service Examination of the concerned year. While a substantial number of O.As filed before the Tribunal at Delhi were pending, a similar number of analo- gous O.As filed before the Benches of Administrative Tribunals at Patna, Allahabad, Chandigarh, Jabalpur, Hyderabad, Jodhpur and Eranakulam were transferred to the Tribunal at Delhi since common questions of law arose for determination in all the O.As. The Tribunal rendered its main judgment in O.A.No. 206/89 Alok Kumar v. Union of India & Ors. and 61 other O.As in which the facts appear to be common. The other judgments were passed on the basis of the conclusions arrived in O.A. No. 206/89 and the connected batch of OAs. Since the Tribunal has set out only the facts in the case of Alok Kurnar (O.A. No. 206/89) treating it as a main application and illustrative of the questions raised, we would like to briefly indicate the facts of A1ok kumar's case so that the impelling circumstances which led to the filing of these appeals and the common questions of law involved may be understood in the proper perspective in the light of the judgment of the Tribunal. In this context, it m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to appear in the next CSE and he had already appeared for the CSE 1988 even before he received the offer of appointment dated 2.1.1989. He was then intimated that if he had already joined the Probationary Training along with 1987 batch, he would not be eligible for consideration for appointment on the basis of subsequent CSE conducted by the UPSC. Besides the main reliefs, Alok Kumar had prayed for an interim order to join and complete the current Probationary Training without being compelled to sign the undertaking sought to be obtained from him subject to final orders in the O.A. The Division Bench of the Tribunal issued an interim order, as prayed for by Alok Kumar, allowing him to join the requisite training for the service to which he had been allocated and allowed him to appear in the interview as and when he was called by the UPSC on the basis of 1988 Examination. The respondents filed their reply explaining the circumstances under which the second proviso was introduced to rule 4 of CSE Rules, its scope and ambit and refuted all the intentions raised by Alok Kumar challenging the legality and constitutionality of the impugned proviso. The Tribunal by its detailed and c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore, the Applications succeed only in part- viz., quashing of the 3rd paragraph of the letter dated 30.8.1988 and 4th paragraph of the letter dated 2nd January, 1989 and similar paragraphs in the letters issued to the applicants by other cadre controlling authorities. Further, a direction is given to the respondents that all those candidates who have been allocated to any of the Central Services, Group 'A' or I.P.S. and who have appeared in Civil Services Main Examination, 1988 or 1989 under the interim orders of the Tribunal and are within the permissible age limit and have succeeded are to be given benefit of their success subject to the provisions of Rule 17 of the C.S.E. Rules. The O.As are dismissed on all other counts." On the basis of the above directions given in paragraphs 5(ii), 6 and 7, we gave some interim directions on 7.12.1990 which are annexed to this judgment as Annexure `A'. Several learned counsel appeared for the respective parties and advanced their submissions interpreting the rules and cited a plethora of decisions in support of their respective cases. Whilst Mr. P.P. Rao, senior counsel assisted by Mr. C.N. Sreekumar and others, Mr. Gopal Su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... subject to the eligibility of age limit is unjustifiable and illegal and amounts to deprivation of the right conferred on them by the Constitution of India? (8) Whether the reasons given by the Govern- ment to justify the introduction of the im- pugned proviso have any rational nexus to the object of the scheme of recruitment to the All lndia Services or/and whether such reasons are arbitrary, unfair and unjust?- (9) Whether the impugned second proviso is suffering from the vice of hostile discrimina- tion and as such violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Recruitment to All India and Central Services - Brief History and Present position: Before entering into an extensive investigation and fullfledged discussion on the questions formulated above, we feel that in order to have a more comprehensive study of the development of the civil service in India a brief history of the past system of recruitment to All India and Central Services based on the then existing mode of selection and the development of the present scheme of examination and method of recruitment till the introduction of the impugned proviso to ru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns in evaluating the scheme of civil services by tracing its birth and breadth of the upper tier of this administrative machinery covering its entire field. On the recommendations of the Kothari Committee the current scheme of Civil Services Examination was introduced from 1979, as per which the Civil Services Examination conducted by the U.P.S.C. has been and is catering to the All India Services viz. IAS, IFS and IPS; and 16 Central Group 'A' Services and 8 Group 'B' Services. In order to be eligible to compete at the examination, a candidate must satisfy the conditions of eligibility, name- ly, nationality, age and requisite qualifications as envis- aged under Regulation 4 of the I.A.S. (Appointment by Competitive Examination) Regulation 1955. In addition to the above qualifications, one more condition of eligibility is added under Regulation 4 (iii-a) substituted vide Department of Personnel and A.R. notification No. 11028/1/78-A1S (1)--A dated 30.12.1978, according to which unless covered by any of the exceptions that may from time to time be notified by the Central Government in this behalf, every candidate appearing for the examination after 1st January, 1979....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; It is apposite, in this connection, to have reference to an excerpt from the United Nations Handbook on Civil Service Laws and Practice, which reads thus: " .... the written papers permit an assess- ment of culture and intellectual competence. This interview permits an assessment of qualities of character which written papers ignore; it attempts to assess the man himself and not his intellectual abilities." This Court in Lila Dhar v. State of Rajasthan and Others, [1981] 4, SCC 159 while expressing its view about the importance and significance of the two tests, namely, the written and interview has observed thus: "The written examination assess the man's intellect and the interview test the man himself and 'the twain shall meet' for a proper selection". AGE LIMIT Coming to the eligibility of age, it was initially fixed at 21 to 26 years and then reduced in 1948 to 21 to 25 years. In the following year, the age range was further reduced to 21 to 24 years except for the Indian Railway Traffic Service for which it continued to be 21 to 25 years upto 1955. The lower age limit for IPS was reduced t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Qualifications for Recruitment) Committee in 1955 recommended that in order to identify the best candidates the number of attempts at the combined examination should be limited to two by reducing the age limit to 21-23 years. The Government accepted the recommendation regarding restriction of the number of attempts to two instead of three, but provided that these were to be counted separately for the following categories of services Category I - IAS and IFS Category II - IPS and Police Service Class II of the Union Territories Category III - Central Services Class I and Class II In view of the acceptance of the above recommendations, from 1961 onwards, the IAS etc. examination became in effect three examinations. Since the restriction on the number of chances were related not to the examination as a whole, but individual categories, theoretically a candidate could take as many chances as the age limit would permit. Thereafter in 1972 the age limit was raised to 26 years and the reduction of attempts from three to two was not implemented following the recommendations of the Administrative Reforms Commission. In fact since 1973, candidates were permitted to make three attempts for e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... pursuant to the recommendations made by various Committees as seen earlier there has been radical change in the system of recruitment to the CSE regard to the scheme of examination, mode of selection, the number of attempts and the eligibility of age limit since such a system was introduced It is clear from the discussion that the totality of the above review on the entire system which system is a legacy of and modelled on the Bri one and a comprehensive survey on the different aspects of the recruitment for the higher civil services manifestly show that this system did not appear suddenly like a 'dues ex machina' created by the legislative test, but evolved in the direction of political objectivity and under- went a long process of gradual transformation and the role and functions of this higher civil services in India after the advent of independence irrefragably play an important and crucial role not only in providing an element of commonality in administration in our parliamentary democracy but also in accelerating socio-economic development of our country in the context of our constitutional objective of growth with the social justice. The present time cycle of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17 and Regulation 4(iii-a) of the I.A.S. (Appointment by Competitive Examination) Regulations, 1955. CSE RULES Rule 4: "Every candidate appearing at the examination, who is otherwise eligible, shall be permitted three attempts at the examination, irrespective of the number of attempts he has already availed of at the IAS etc. Examination held in previous year. The restriction shall be effective from the Civil Services Examination held in 1979. Any at- tempts made at the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination held in 1979 and onwards will count as attempts for this purpose: Provided that this restriction on the number of attempts will not apply in the case of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candi- dates who are otherwise eligible: Provided further that a candidate who on the basis of the results of the previous Civil Services Examination, had been allocated to the I.P.S. or Central Services, Group 'A' but who expressed his intention to appear in the next Civil Services Main Examination for competing for IAS, IFS, IPS or Central Services, Group 'A' and who was permitted to abstain from the probationary training in order to so appear, shall be eligi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for appointment to Indian Police Service/Central Service, Group 'A' mentioned in Col. 2 below on the results of an earlier examination will be considered only for appointment in services mentioned against that service in Col. 3 below on the results of this examination. S. No. Service to which approved for appointment Service for which eligible to compete 1 2 3 1. Indian Police Service I.A.S., I.F.S., and Central Services, Group 2. Central Services, Group 'A' I.A.S.,I.F.S. and I.P.S. Provided further that a candidate who is appointed to a Central Service, Group 'B' on the results of an earlier examination will be considered only for appointment to I.A.S., I.F.S., I.P.S. and Central Services, Group 'A'. IAS (Appointment by Competitive Examination) Regulations, 1955 Regulation 4: Conditions of Eligibility: - In order to be eligible to compete at the examination, a candidate must satisfy the following conditions, namely:- (i) Nationality......................... (ii) Age ................................ (iii) Educational Qualifications........... (iii-a) Attempts at the ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o a service on the basis of the next Civil Service (Main) Examination, he should either join that service or the service to which he has already been allocated on the basis of the previous CSE; 2) If the candidate fails to join either of the services as mentioned in the first condi- tion of this second part then his allocation to the service based on one or both examina- tions, as the case may be, shall stand can- celled; and 3) Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 8, a candidate a) who accepts allocation to the service and b) who is appointed to a service shall not be eligible to appear again in CSE unless he has first resigned from the service. The sum and substance of the above proviso is that a candidate who has already been allocated to the IPS/Central Services Group 'A' and who in order to improve his efficacy of selection to higher civil service, expresses his inten- tion to appear in the next CSE (Main) for competing for IAS, IFS, IPS or Central Services Group 'A' and who has been permitted to abstain from the Probationary Training in order to do so, will become eligible to appear in the next CSE (Main) bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g programmes where under they had to undergo specialised training and acquire the necessary potential to perform their tasks in the service to which they have been allocated and for which training, the Government incurs huge expenditure. Therefore, the Government in order to overcome the problem of indiscipline amongst the probationers undergoing training, requested the kothari committee for making a comprehensive survey on the different aspects of the recruitment scheme and to submit a report with its recommendations on the recruitment policy and selection methods so that the candidates who are selected and allocated to a service and sent for training may not take enmass leave for preparing and appearing in the next CSE by neglecting and pretermitting their training programmes and thereby creating a vacuum in the service for considerable time. The said kothari committee, after deeply examining this serious problem, submitted its report, the relevant part of which is as follows: "3.59. It may further be observed that the existing system which permits that candidates qualifying for and joining the police or the Central Services, may appear the Civil Services Examination to improv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aption 'Fundamental Duties' added by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976 in accordance with the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee. The said Article contains a mandate of the Constitution that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to do the various things specified in Clauses (a) to (j) of which clause (j) commands that it is the duty of every citizen of India to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement." In our view, the effort taken by the Government in giving utmost importance to the training programme of the selectees so that this higher civil service being the top most service of the country is not wasted and does not become fruitless during the training period is in consonance with the provisions of Article 51-A (j). The Constitution of India has laid down some basic principles relating to public services in Part XIV entitled 'Services under the Union and the State' which has two Chapters, namely chapter I on "Services" covering Articles 308 to 314 of which Article 314 is now repealed by the Twenty eighth Ame....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not repeal the essential features of the pre-existing Rule 4 but only limits the ambit of the operation of Rule 4 under a given situation. Hence, there is no substance in contending that the second proviso is bad and that the central executive authority has transgressed the constitutional limits. However, the validity of second proviso the Rule 4 is challenged on Constitution about is violative of Article 14 ground that which we will deal at the later part of the judgment. We feel that it would be appropriate, in this context, to recall the observations of this Court in L.I.C. of India v. Escorts Ltd., AIR 1986 SC 1370 at page 1403 = [1986] 1 SCC 264. The observation reads thus: "When construing statutes enacted in the national interest, we have necessarily to take the broad factual situations contemplated by the Act and interpret its provisions so as to advance and not to thwart the particular national interest whose advancement is pro- posed by the legislation." In the above background, we shall now advert to the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants. Mr. P.P. Rao, senior counsel appearing for the appellants forcibly and fervently contended that the second prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cruitment by competitive examination, and sub-rule (2) which states that an examination, namely, the competitive examination for recruitment to the service shall be conducted by the Commis- sion in accordance with such regulations as the Central Government may from time to time make in consultation with the Commission and State Governments. According to him, the permissible number of attempts that a candidate can avail is also a condition of eligibility because the object is for a dual purpose, namely, 'to get the best and to retain the best', and that Regulation 4 (iii-a) should be read with Rule 4 of CSE as its part. He continues to state that under Article 73 of the Constitution, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Central Government in exercise of its executive power can regulate the manner in which the right of a candidate in appearing for the competitive examination is to be exercised and, therefore, the restriction imposed in the second proviso to Rule 4 of CSE Rules is in no way ultra-vires clause (iii-a) of Regulation 4 of Regulations, 1955. The source of power for the Central Government for making rules and regulations for 'Recruitment and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion, every candidate normally can appear for all the permitted attempts at the examination whether three or four. The impugned second proviso does not restrict or put an embargo on the number of attempts in the normal course. But the restriction is only when the conditions enumerated in the impugned proviso are satisfied. In order to appreciate and understand the restriction imposed, in its proper perspective, we shall refer to certain decisions of this Court cited by both the parties, firstly with reference to the interpretation of statutes and second with regard to the construction of a proviso in relation to the subject matter covered by the section/rule to which the proviso is appended. Before we cogitate and analyse this bone of contention in some detail, it will be convenient at this stage to pore over some of the well established rules of construction which would assist us to steer clear of the impasse entertained by the learned counsel, according to whom some complications are created by the impugned notification being ultra-vires clause (iii-a) of Regulation 4 of Regulations, 1955. Maxwell on the "Interpretation of Statutes" 10th Edition page 7 states thus: " ..........
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll recognised canons of construction is that the legislature speaks its mind by use of correct expression and unless there is any ambiguity in the language of the provision the Court should adopt literal construction if it does not lead to an absurdity." The Constitution Bench of this court in A.R. Antulay v.R.S. Nayak, [1984] 2 SCR 914 at 936 has observed thus: "It is a well established canon of construction that the Court should read the section as it is and cannot rewrite it to suit its convenience; nor does any canon of construction permit the court to read the section in such manner as to render it to some extent otiose." The Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and another v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmar sheti etc. etc., [1985] 1 SCR 29 ruled that the well established doctrine of interpretation is "That the provisions contained in a statutory enactment or in rules/regulations framed thereunder have to be so construed as to be in harmony with each other and that where under a specific section or rule a particular subject has received special treatment, such special provision will exclude the applicability of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to be interpreted without any violence to its language and applied as far as its explicit language admits consistent with the established rule of interpretation. A proviso to a Section/Rule is expected to except or qualify something in the enacting part and presumed to be necessary. Coming to the broad general rule of construction of the proviso Maxwell on "The Interpretation of statute" in the 11th edition at page 155 has quoted a passage from Kent's Commentary 0n American Law, 12th Edn. Vol. 1, 463n, reading thus: "The true principle undoubtedly is, that the sound interpretation and meaning of the stat- ute, on a view of the enacting clause, saving clause and proviso, taken and construed together is to prevail." Maxwell in his 12th Edition has quoted a passage from Att. Gen. v. Chelsea Waterworks Co., [1731] Fitzg. 195 which reads that if a proviso cannot reasonably be construed otherwise than as contradicting the main enactment, then the proviso will prevail on the principle that "it speaks that last intention of the makers". It is pointed out in Piper v. Harvey, [1958] 10.B.439 that if, however, the language of the proviso makes it plain tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpugned second proviso to Rule 4 of the CSE Rules is interpreted in its grammatical meaning and cognate expressions and construed harmoniously with the substantive rule in the light of the above decisions of this Court as well as the views expressed by various authors in their Text Books on this subject, it is pellucid that the said proviso only carves out an exception to Rule 4 of the CSE Rules in given circumstances and under specified conditions and, therefore, the second proviso cannot be read in isolation and interpreted literally. On the other hand the substantive Rule 4 is to be read in conjunction with the two provisos appended thereto so as to have a correct interpretation. In the proviso, in dispute, there are no positive words or indications which would completely exclude the operation of the substantive rule the spirit of which is reflected in Regulation 4 of the Regulations, 1955. In fact, Rule 4 as stood till 1986, in its normal course, allowed a candidate to appear for three attempts, since increased to 4 for 1990 and 1991 Examinations. But the restriction is imposed by the second proviso only under certain circumstances as repeated- ly indicated above. Although the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uncompromising and strin- gent provision is that the candidates appointed to the IAS and IFS are required to man the key positions both in the Central and State Services wherein the appointees have to combine their intellectual capacity and the requisite traits of personality and also to exhibit higher intellectual proficiency and leadership. Thus Rule 8 keeps up and main- tains the phenomenon of the upper civil service, run under our constitution with all enduring features and facets of the said service on All India basis. But there is no bar for a candidate who is appointed to the lAS/FS resigning from that service and sitting in the examination for IPS or any Central Service Group 'A'. Under Rule 4 of CSE Rules not- withstanding anything contained in Rule 8, a candidate who accepts allocation to a service and appointed to that service shall not be eligible to appear again in the CSE unless he first resigns from that service. In other words, a candidate who is allocated and appointed to a service can sit in the ensuing examination provided he first resigns from that service. This restriction, in our view, is a reasonable one in order to achieve the desired result in the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the subsequent examination. According to him, in other words, the candidates who did not avail the benefit of abstaining from the probation- ary training with the permission of the Government in order to appear at the next Civil Services (Main) Examination do not fail within the scope of the impugned restriction and they cannot be asked to resign as a condition precedent to their appear- ing again in the CSE. This tenuous argument does not appeal to us. Firstly the expression "such candidate", is not used in the proviso, on the other hand, the words used are "a candidate" (vide publication of Gazette of India dated 13-12-86). Secondly the last part of the proviso, as it stands, reads "a candidate who accepts allocation to a service and is appointed to a service shall not be eligible to appear again in the Civil Services Examination unless he has first resigned from the service." Thirdly a correct and proper reading of the last limb of the proviso clearly demonstrates that the expression "a candidate" refers only to the candidate, mentioned in the earlier part of the proviso. Lastly, if such an interpretation is to be given on the wrong reading of the proviso, then the whole object ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....P.S.C.) shall forward to the Central Government a list arranged in order of merit of the candidates who have qualified by such standard as the Commission may determine. In the normal course, a candidate belonging to SC/ST category can enjoy all the benefits under the rules and regulations. But the restriction imposed under the second proviso is only for a specified category of candidates by treating all such candidates at par and without making any exception to the candidates belonging to SC/ST. The submission made by Mrs. Chopra that the second proviso is an independent one does not merit consideration because the second proviso to Rule 4 begins with the words 'provided timber...." which expression would mean that a strict com- pliance of the second proviso is an additional requirement to that of the substantive rule 4 and the first proviso. The expression "provided further" spells out that the first proviso cannot be read in isolation or independent of the second proviso but it must be read in conjunction with the second proviso. To put in other words, once the candidates belonging to SC or ST get through one common examination and interview test and are allocated and appoin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, Article 335 is more specific and cannot be brushed aside or truncated in the operational ambit vis-a-vis Article 16(1) and (2) without hubristic aberration." In Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh (Railway) v. Union of India & Others, [1981]1 SCC 246, Krishna lyer, J observed that Article 16(4) is not a jarring note but auxiliary to fair fulfilment of Article 16(1) and further said, "Article 16(4) is not in the nature of an exception to Article 16(1). It is a facet of Article 16(1) which fosters and furthers the idea of equality of opportunity with spe- cial reference to an underprivileged and deprived class of citizens to whom egalite de droit (formal or legal equality) is not egalite de fait (practical or factual equality). See also M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore, [1963] Supp. 1 SCR 439, Triloki Nath v. State of J&K, [1969] 1 SCR 103 and T. Devadasan v. Union of India, [1964] 4 SCR 680 and Comptroller and Auditor-General of India v. K.S. Jagannathan, [1986] 2 SCC 679 at 684 (para 6). The Constitution, no doubt, has laid a special responsibility on the Government to protect the claims of SC/ST in the matter of public appointments under various Constitu- tional provisions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the aforementioned reasons, we find no merits in the submission of Mrs. Chopra that the second proviso is not applicable to the candidates belonging to SC or ST. Mr. Gopal Subramanian appearing on behalf of some of the appellants supplemented by the arguments of other counsel, stating that the very structure of the recruitment policy is itself disturbed to the great disadvantage of the candidates who since then have been enjoying the right to appear for 3 attempts as conferred by the substantive Rule 4 and that one of the present restrictions that the candidates should severe from the service, if intends to appear for the third time, after he has been allocated and appointed to a service is unjust, unreasonable and it seriously transgresses on the main provision and virtually interdicts the candidates from availing their statutorily conferred and protected right. Therefore, such a serverance of status from the service is ex-facie wrong, even if one can understand losing of senior- ity. We have already discussed this interpellation in extenso while dealing with similar contentions and our considered view expressed albeit will clearly answer this contention. Hence, we hold that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by another course of practical train- ing. The rationale underlying the course at the training centres is that the officers of civil services must acquire an understanding of the constitutional, social, economic and administrative framework within which they have to function and also must have a complete sense of involvement in the training and thereafter in the service to which/she is appointed. It is apparent that initial training is in the nature of providing young probationers an opportunity to counter-act their weak points and at the same time develop their social abilities and as such the aspect of training is the most important of all. It was brought to the notice of the Government that the probationers who have been allocated to the IPS and Group 'A' service were more often than not completely neglecting their training in the academies/Training Institutes and also have gone on enmass leave thereby creating a complete vacuum in the academy and the Training Institutes for the purpose of preparing for the next CSE (Main) in the hope of getting a better position and a more preferred service like IAS, IFS etc. without having a sense of involvement with the service t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dates recruited through the same open competition to the remaining Group 'B' services are concerned despite the fact that the level of responsibility is the same and the qualifications prescribed are comparable. This kind of classification between these two groups has no rational nexus with the object of selection. The reasons attributed for such a classification on the ground of neglect of train- ing, financial loss, unemployment situation, loss to service are all common to all the Central Service Group 'A' listed in the CCS Rules, and therefore, the impugned second proviso is held to be discriminatory against the candidates appoint- ed to the IPS and 16 Group 'A' services and as such it is violative of Article 14. The impugned proviso makes a further discrimination vis-a-vis candidates appointed to Group 'B' services, in that the said proviso by placing the onerous condition of resignation from service of candidates appointed to the IPS and Group 'A' service in substance and effect and it precludes them from competing for higher civil service with the candidates appointed to Group 'B' service and thereby facilitates the selection of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... selected candidates in the order of merit is published and thereafter the successful candidates are allocated to different services namely IAS, IFS, IPS, Group 'A' and Group 'B' services based on their ranks and preferences. Of the candidates, IAS and IFS are top rankers in the merit list. In the notification dated 13.12.1986 issued by the Ministry of Personnel, there were only 28 services/posts of which the first three were IAS, IFS and IPS and of the remaining (iv) to (xviii) were Group 'A' services and (xix) to (xxviii) were Group 'B' services. In the list of Group 'A' services, items (xvii) and (xviii) were Grade II and III respectively. In notification dated 19.12.1987, there were in total 27 services/posts of which the first three were the same and the services under (iv) to (xix) were Group 'A' services and (xx) to (xxvii) were Group 'B' services. In the nomenclature of Group 'A' and Group 'B' services, there was slight variation. In the subsequent notification issued on 17.12.1988, besides the first three services being the same, the total number of services in group 'A' was 16 and in Group ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervices. Consequently, those allocated to Group 'B' services get lower position compared to those allocated to Group 'A' services. The pay scales in Group 'B' services are comparatively less than those meant for IAS, IFS and IFS and Central Services Group 'A'. There is a clear cut separation on the basis of ranking and merit and, therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that both Group 'A' and Group 'B' services fall under one and the same category but on the other, these services are two distinct and separate categories failing under two different classifications. The Additional Solicitor General refuting the arguments of Mr. P.P. Rao that there is a discrimination between Group 'A' and Group 'B' services, in that whilst an Under Secretary, selected in Group 'A' services, is not allowed to sit for examination by availing his third chance, a Section Officer coming under Group 'B' services is permitted to sit for examination availing his chance without resigning from service, emphatically stated that this argument has no merit since in Group 'A' services, there is a vertical ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the services under Group 'A' and Group 'B' are different services and, therefore, the condi- tions of service of a particular service cannot be compared with other service especially when the services are not at par and more so when the other service, namely, Group 'B' service is less in rank and merit to that of Group 'A' Service. In passing, all the learned counsel in assailing the validity of the impugned second proviso drew our attention to various Service Rules, such as Central Secretariat Service Rules, Indian Revenue Service Rules, 1988, Indian Cus- toms and Central Excise Service Group 'A' Rules, 1987, Department of Revenue (Customs Appraiser) Recruitment Rules, 1988, Indian Railway Personnel Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1975 and Delhi and Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service Rules, 1971 - all made under Article 309 of the Constitution of India - and attempted to show that various provisions of those rules relating to the recruitment and service conditions go in support of their submissions that there is a hostile discrimination between the candidates of Group 'A' services and Group 'B' services. In our consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....test of permissible classification and held that the classification in that case was based on intelligible differentia, observing thus: "It is the Central Government which bears the financial burden of running the medical col- lege. It is for h to lay down the criteria for eligibility. From the very nature of things it is not possible to throw the admission open to students from all over the country. The Government cannot be denied the right to decide from what sources the admission will be made. That essentially is a question of policy and depends inter alia on an overall assessment and survey of the requirements of residents of particular territories and other categories of persons for whom it is necessary to provide facilities for medical education. If the sources are properly classified whether on territorial, geographical or other reasonable basis it is not for the Courts to inter- fere with the manner and method of making the classification." In the above case, the Court has distinguished the decision in Rajendran's case (referred to above). Y.V. Chandrachud, J as he then was speaking for the Constitution Bench in State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Trilo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of national considerations. We cannot, as Court, give directives as to how the De- fence Ministry should function except to State that the obligation not to act arbitrarily and to treat employees equally is binding on the Union of India because if functions under the Constitution and not over it ............... It is entirely within the reasonable discretion of the Union of India. It may stick to the earlier policy or give it up. But one imperative of the Constitution implicit in Article 14 is that if it does change its policy, it must do so fairly and should not give the impression that it is acting by any ulterior criteria or arbitrarily.'' See also Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh (Railway)'s case (already referred to). In Deepak Sibal v. Punjab University, [1989] 2 SCC 145 M.M. Dutt, J speaking for the Court has held thus: "In order to consider the question as to the reasonableness of the classification, it is necessary to take into account the objective for such classification. If the objective be illogical, unfair and unjust, necessarily the classification will have to be held as unreasonable. Surrounding circumstances may be taken ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to, the rival contention is that there is no nexus between the classification and the object to be achieved thereby, that in fact the classification defeated that object, that if chances of sitting for examination are denied to a few with equals, there is inherent vice attached to such classification and that in such circumstances, the unreasonableness of the classification becomes patent. It is further urged on behalf of the appellants that this classification foments frustration amongst the selectees of group 'A' services and produces inefficiency by placing men of lower efficiency in a very advantageous position. Mr. P.P. Rao would urge that if there is a vertical movement in group 'A' services as stated by Mr. Kapil Sibal, how can candidates in group 'B' services be permitted to sit for examination of IAS, IFS and IPS by passing the meritorious candidates under group 'A' and therefore the classification is per se irrational, unjust and discriminatory and as such ultra-vires Article 14. We shall now bestow out judicious thought over this matter and carefully examine the rival contentions of the rival parties in the light of the guiding principl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... itself must not be irrational or discriminatory (Vide Kasturi v. State of J & K (albeit). As ruled by this Court in Ameeroonissa v. Mah- boob, [1953] SCR 405 and Gopi Chand v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1959 SC 609 that differential treatment does not per se constitute violation of Article 14 and it denies equal protection only when there is no rational or reasonable basis for the differentiation. Thus Article 14 condemns discrimination and forbids class legislation but permits classification founded on intelligible differentia having a rational relationship with the object sought to be achieved by the Act/Rule/Regulation in question. The Government is legitimately empowered to frame rules of classification for securing the requisite standard of efficiency in services and the classification need not scientifically be perfect or logically complete. As observed by this Court more than once, every classification is likely in some degree 10 produce some inequality. The provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution have come up for discussion before this Court in a number of cases but we feel that in the present case, it is not necessary to go in for any lengthy discussion as 10 the o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... IPS and the several categories of the All India Central Services, the Examination for which was held in September 1956 but before that date he received an information from the Home Ministry that he could not appear for that examination because he was still on probation. prior to the date on which he completed his probation and was confirmed as an Assistant, the Minis- try of Home Affairs issued the impugned notification on 14.3.1957 pointing out that there was an acute shortage of Grade IV Assistants in the Secretariat Service and that the Assistants would not be permitted to compete at the examination to be held in 1957 and that those who were desirous of competing their candidature would be restricted to an appointment to Grade III of the Central Secretariat alone. We are not giving the facts of other two writ petitions since the common question decided was the same. Rajagopala Ayyangar, J while speaking for the Constitu- tion Bench in that case has held: "If, as must must be, it is conceded that the existencies, convenience, or necessity or a particular department might justify the imposition of a total ban on the employees in that department, from seeking....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id proviso is not ultra-vires Article 14 or Article 16 of the Constitution of India. Before parting with the judgment, we feel that it has become necessary to give a specific direction to the respondents inclusive of the Union Public Service Commission in pursuance of the earlier directions given in our order dated 7.12.1990 (vide Annexure 'A') which directions were given in pursuance of various interim orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi and thereafter finally in its final judgments dated 20.8.90, 4.10.90 and 5.10.90. For ready reference and to have a proper perspective, we would like to proliferate the following passage from our earlier order dated 7.12.1990: "Hence we permit all those candidates failing under Para Nos. 5 (ii), 6 and 7 to sit for the main examination subject to the condition that each candidate satisfies the Secretary, Union Public Service Commission. that' he/she falls within these categories and that the concern candidates have passed the preliminary examination of 1990 and have also applied for the main examination within the due date. This permission is only f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring in their respective appeals and also the learned Additional Solicitor for respondents for a very considerable length of time. The main thrust of the argument advanced on behalf of all the appellants is that the second proviso to Rule 4 of the Civil Services Examination Rules (published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-I Section, dated December 17, 1988) is offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is contrary to law. As the above question requires a careful examination with regard to the individual cases listed for consideration and as we are informed that the Central Services Examination Commences on 17.12.1990, we arc constrained to give the following directions on the basis of the conclusions arrived at by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in its judgment dated 20th August 1990. The relevant conclusions as they appear from the concluding portion of the judgment of the Tribunal are as follows:- 5(ii). A candidate who has been allocated to the I.P.S. or to a Central Services, Group 'A' May be allowed to sit at the next Civil Service Examination, provided he is within the permissible age limit,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ara 5(ii), we shall reproduce some interim orders made by the Tribunal during the hearing of the O.As. In M.P. No. 1269/90 in OA No. 1074/90 dated 31.5.1990 which has given rise to SLP (Civil) Nos. 13525-38/90, the C.A.T., New Delhi has passed the following order:- "We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. In our opinion, a direction should be issued to the respondents to permit the applicants to appear in the preliminary C.S.E. 1990 without press- ing for their resignations from the service and respondents may also grant them necessary leave etc. This interim order will be subject to the order in O.A. 206/1989 and connected cases." Interim order passed on 4.6.1990 in Regn. No. 0A/160/90 by CAT, New Delhi which has given rise to Civil Appeal No. 5470/90 reads thus:- "The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has applied for the 1990 Civil Services Preliminary Examination well in time and has also received Roll Number from the Union Public Service Commission and that he is not being allowed to appear in the Examination in view of the power conferred by the second proviso to Ru....