Anushka Sharma –
Published On: October 27, 2021 at 08:00 IST
The Centre and States asked the Supreme Court to clarify the rules for reservation in promotions, claiming that ambiguity had caused several appointments to be postponed.
After a 5-Judge Bench responded to the reference in the case Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta in 2018, a Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, and BR Gavai is hearing the case.
“It is the duty of the court to suggest and direct a method by which a standard or a yardstick is laid down which is certain and definite for the purpose of deciding the data which has to be looked into,” the Attorney General of India submitted.
Attorney General KK Venugopal argued that while Nagaraj stated that there should be measurable data regarding adequacy of representation, it should not have stopped there.
The Additional Solicitor General further submitted, “They should have specified what data to look for….if your lordships do not lay down a definite and decisive ground which states and Union will follow, there will be a multitude of litigation..and there will never be any end to the issue on what the principle be on which reservation has to be made. Jarnail Singh had left it to the states but that means we are going back to square one. Because nobody knows what it is that satisfies adequacy.”
Solicitor General, Balbir Singh argued that if someone claimed the advantage of reservation at the entry level and subsequently received merit on subsequent promotions, he or she would be counted for the purpose of determining adequacy of representation.
Additional Solicitor General said he would return to court after receiving detailed instructions on whether a person who has not claimed any benefit at the entry or promotion level is eligible for benefits.
The Bench reserved its judgment after hearing all the concerned parties.
Also Read: What is Reservation in Government Jobs?