- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 27 January 1995
- Bench
- K. Ramaswamy, B. L. Hansaria
- Result
- Appeal allowed.
Headnote
SelVice La~Appointment to a post reseJVed for Schedule Tribes-Scheduled Tribe candidate available but not selecte~Later appointment of same candidate cannot be per se illegal.
The Gujarat University published a notification calling for recruit· ment to the post of Lecturer (Psychology). Appellant belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Gujarat, though available, was not selected. Respondent came to be selected and sought to be appointed. Appellant went to Court and pending appeal, she was selected and appointed as Lecturer (Psycholgy). The Division Bench of the High Court held that when .l. \__ r-the selection was made, the appellant did not have the requisite qualifica-tion for appointment to the post. Hence this appeal.
Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : Though initially, the appellant did not have the laboratory experience but later on she acquired it and was, therefore, eligible and accordingly appointed. The post was reserved for Scheduled Tribe and when a Schedule Tribe candidate was available, the appointment cannot be held per se illegal. [669-D]
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave arises against the order of the Division .A Bench of th~ High Court of Gujarat in LPA No. 161/87 dated November 22, 1993. The appellant admittedly belongs to Bakshi Panch which is one of the Nomadic Tribes, notified as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Gujarat. The Gujarat University had published a notification calling for recruitment to the post of Lecturer (Psychology). Initially though the appellant was available, she was not selected. Consequently, the contesting respondent came to be selected and sought to be appointed. The appellant ultimately went to the court. Pending appeal, she was selected and ap-pointed and has now been working as Lecturer (Psychology) in the Gujarat University. The Division Bench of the High Court held that when the selection was made, she was not found to be suitable. The requisite qualifications were not sufficient for appellant's claim to the post.
We are unable to appreciate the reasoning of the Division Bench. It is true that initially the respondent did not have the laboratory experience but later on she had acquired that experience. She was also eligible and was accordingly appointed. Admittedly, the post was reserved for the ·'(. Scheduled Tribes and when a Scheduled Tribe candidate is available,
his/her appointment cannot be held per se illegal. Therefore, the High Court was not right in negativing the right of the appellant in this behalf.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. The appointment made to the appellant shall continue as one reserved for Scheduled Tribes. No costs.
Case details
Arising from
CIVIL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3010 of 1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.11.93 of the Gujarat High Court in L.P.A. No. 161of1987.
Appearances
Mrs. J.S. Wad for the Appellant. ...,._ Raju Ramachandran and R.P. Wadhwani for the Respondents.
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.