Hence, such reservation can, at best, be provided only horizontally and not on the basis of SC’s decision: CJ
Hence, such reservation can, at best, be provided only horizontally and not on the basis of SC’s decision: CJ
The Constitution does not explicitly allow reservation for women in public employment. In contrast, Article 16(2) prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in public employment. Therefore, the Madras High Court ruled that only horizontal and vertical reservation could not be provided to women based on the Supreme Court’s decision in the famous Indra Sawhney case (1992).
Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N. Mala held that the 30% reservation provided to women in public employment under Section 26 of the Tamil Nadu Government Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 would be declared unconstitutional if the State Government and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) used vertical methodology. wanted to continue the practice.
The judges clarified that the legal provision can be saved only if the government is ready to implement it horizontally in future appointments. He advised the government to amend the provision accordingly. The judgment was delivered while disposing of a batch of writ petitions filed in 2013, 2021 and 2022 challenging the “wrong” methodology adopted by the TNPSC for providing reservation to women.
The bench concurred with the counsel for the petitioners that TNPSC should not first reserve 30% vacancies for women and then decide on social reservation as such practice is leading to recruitment of more number of women who are meritorious. Too much for the loss. Male candidates. It states that this practice virtually enforced a kind of vertical reservation for women.
The court said that the petitioners had brought to its notice that in the process of recruitment of 1,141 Veterinary Assistant Surgeons, only 342 amounted to 30% quota. 424 women could have been selected even if the overall merit was taken into account. However, due to the “wrong” methodology, 544 women were selected.
The court said that the women who scored less than 279.25 marks were selected while the men with 337 marks could not make it due to wrong methodology.
Therefore the Court ordered that the Commission should first prepare a list of meritorious candidates following the vertical reservation under General Turn, Backward Class, SC and ST categories.
Next, it should find out the number of horizontal reservation beneficiaries such as physically handicapped and women selected on the basis of merit under each social category. If less number of women/physically handicapped are selected in a particular social category as compared to the percentage of horizontal reservation prescribed for them, additional beneficiaries should be included in that category by deleting names from the bottom of the list. However, if more number of women/physically handicapped have been selected in any category, they need not worry as women were entitled to compete in the remaining 70% vacancies also, the judges said.
The bench said that their decision would not apply to appointments which had already been made. However, in cases where appointments were yet to take place, including selection processes which were subject to challenge in the present batch of writ petitions, the TNPSC must follow the correct methodology as highlighted by the High Court, failing which women will Entire reservation will be valid. Declared ultra vires to the constitution.