9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Legislature of Bihar was competent to enact the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services Act, 1991 imposing reservations for direct recruitment to the posts in the Judiciary. 2. Whether Section 4 of the Act is ultra vires Articles 233 and 234 of the Constitution. 3. Whether the provisions of the Act should be read down to exclude its application to Judicial Services. 4. What final order should be passed. Summary: Issue 1: Competence of Bihar Legislature to Enact the Act The Supreme Court examined whether the Bihar Legislature was competent to enact the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services Act, 1991, particularly Section 4, which imposed reservations for direct recruitment to the posts in the Judiciary. The Court held that the Act, on its express language, covered Judicial Services of the Bihar State. The term "State" under Section 2(n) and the definition of "establishment" under Section 2(c) included the Judiciary, thereby making the Act applicable to Judicial Services. Issue 2: Ultra Vires Nature of Section 4 The Court analyzed whether Section 4 of the Act was ultra vires Articles 233 and 234 of the Constitution. Articles 233 and 234 provide a complete scheme for the recruitment and appointment of District Judges and other judicial officers, requiring consultation with the High Court. The Court held that the impugned Section 4, which imposed a blanket reservation of 50% for SC, ST, and OBC candidates, conflicted with the Constitutional scheme. The High Court's role in the recruitment process, as mandated by Articles 233 and 234, could not be bypassed by legislative enactment. Thus, Section 4 was held ultra vires to the extent it applied to Judicial Services. Issue 3: Reading Down the Provisions The Court considered whether the provisions of the Act should be read down to exclude its application to Judicial Services. It was held that Section 4 of the Act should not apply to the recruitment and appointments to the cadre of District Judges and the cadre of Judiciary subordinate to the District Judges. The Act would continue to operate for other services of the State but not for Judicial Services. Issue 4: Final Order The Court modified the impugned judgments of the High Court as follows: 1. The Act, as framed, applies to Judicial Services, but Section 4 will not apply to the recruitment and appointments to the cadre of District Judges and the cadre of Judiciary subordinate to the District Judges. 2. The High Court's observation that preference should be given to reserved category candidates of equal merit with general category candidates is unnecessary and has no legal effect. 3. The High Court should follow the agreed preference for SC and ST candidates until an appropriate scheme of reservation is promulgated by the Governor in consultation with the High Court. 4. For direct recruitment at the grass-root level, the existing reservation of 14% for SC and 10% for ST candidates should continue until any new scheme is formulated in consultation with the High Court. The appeals were dismissed subject to these modifications and directions, with no order as to costs.
|
