(1995) 10 SC CK 0015
**In The Supreme Court of India**
**Case No:** Civil Appeal No. 9272 of 1995 (with connected cases)
**Parties:** Union of India and others (Appellant) vs. Virpal Singh Chauhan and others (Respondent)
**Date of Decision:** 10-10-1995
**Bench:** Hon’ble S.C. Agrawal & B.P. Jeevan Reddy, JJ.
**Citation:** AIR 1996 SC 448; (1995) 6 SCC 684
**Final Decision:** Appeals Dismissed
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=278263
Law Points Raised:
- Whether reservation in promotion also grants consequential seniority.
- Applicability and limits of the 40-point and 100-point roster system.
- Rights of general category employees vs. reserved category in promotions.
- Seniority determination when reserved category candidates get accelerated promotion.
Ratio Decidendi:
The Court held that while reservation in promotion is valid under Article 16(4), it does not automatically entitle the reserved category candidates to consequential seniority. Seniority in a particular grade must be based on actual length of service in that grade and not accelerated promotion due to reservation.
Final Ruling:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the Central Administrative Tribunal’s view that accelerated promotions due to reservation do not grant seniority over general candidates who are otherwise senior in the feeder cadre.
Relevant Paragraphs for Reference:
Refer especially to Paragraph 1, 2, 4, 5, and 26 for detailed reasoning and final guidelines on reservation, promotion, and seniority.
Summary:
This landmark judgment laid down that reserved category candidates promoted earlier due to reservation cannot claim seniority over general category candidates who are otherwise senior. This decision harmonizes Article 16(4) (reservation in promotions) with the equality clause in Articles 14 and 16(1), and is a foundational precedent on the subject of consequential seniority.
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=278263