Supreme Court: UPSC Candidates have no Liberty to Allocate Cadre of Choice

Chaini Parwani –

Published On: October 23, 2021 at 09:30 IST

The Supreme Court while setting aside the Orders passed by the Kerala High Court observed that successful Civil Services Candidates have no Freedom to be Allocated a Cadre or place of Appointment of their choice as they opt to serve anywhere in the Country with Eyes wide open.

A Bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian held that if candidates from Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), or Other Backward Class (OBC) get selected in the General Category without recourse to the benefit of reservation, they cannot use it for getting cadre or place of appointment of choice.

Justice Gupta, drafted the 36-page Judgement for the Bench, stated that Scramble for the Home cadre” begins once the candidates get designated to All-India Service.

Further the Bench while pertaining to the Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, observed that the process for allocation of cadre is a ‘Mechanical Process’ and the State has no Diplomacy at its ‘Whims and Fancies’. (The actual meaning of Personal Liberty under Article 21)

The Court stated “It was Held that a selected candidate has a Right to be considered for appointment to the IAS but he has no such right to be allocated to a cadre of his choice or his home State. As stated above, allotment of cadre is an incidence of Service.”

The Case came to light when Central Government argued a Verdict of the Kerala High Court which allowed to grant home cadre Kerala to A Shainamol.

Shainamol is a Muslim woman IAS officer, appointed in Himachal Pradesh. Shainamol secured 20th rank in the UPSC Civil Services Examination in the year 2006 under the General Category, notwithstanding Muslim OBC Category.

Shainamol was appointed Himachal Pradesh cadre. Shainamol then moved the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal against the allocation.

The Apex Court had observed that the entire basis of the foundation of the Applicant is that there was no discourse with the State of Kerala and that the applicant was appointed to the State of Himachal Pradesh where there was Authorization given by the State of Himachal Pradesh for her allocation to that State.

The Apex Court also noted that no Consultation was required to be Executed in respect of the applicant with Kerala State.

Also Read: Supreme Court rejects WB Govt Plea to appoint DGP without input of UPSC

Related Post