MANDEEP KUMAR AND OTHERS versus U.T. CHANDIGARH & OTHERS

MANDEEP KUMAR AND OTHERS versus U.T. CHANDIGARH & OTHERS

Under Section 7 of the 2006 Act de-reservation or interchangeability of reserved vacancies can only be effected by the Department of Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes upon recording satisfaction that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest; the appointing authority has no power to de-reserve. The Policy letter permitting interchangeability, as restored, is not inconsistent with Section 7, but appellants were not entitled to relief after the long lapse of time and where departmental concurrence was not granted; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant(s): Mandeep Kumar and Others; Respondent(s): U.T. Chandigarh & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Decided by Supreme Court (final Judgment on Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
De Reservation of Reserved Vacancies, Interchangeability of Reserved Posts, Reservation in Public Employment, Punjab Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (reservation in Service) Act, 2006, Policy Letter No. 1945 WG 54 17246
Service Law Reservation Law Administrative Law De Reservation of Reserved Vacancies Interchangeability of Reserved Posts Reservation in Public Employment Punjab Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (reservation in Service) Act, 2006 Policy Letter No. 1945 WG 54 17246

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mandeep Kumar and Others

Appellant(s)

U.T. Chandigarh & Others

Respondent(s)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Decided by Supreme Court (final Judgment on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether de-reservation/interchangeability of reserved SC/ST vacancies to OBC can be effected by the appointing authority or only by the Department of Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes under Section 7 of the 2006 Act
  2. 2 Whether Policy letter No.17246 permits interchangeability despite Section 7 of the 2006 Act
  3. 3 Whether appellants are entitled to appointment against 595 unfilled SC/ST vacancies after a lapse of time and fresh recruitment processes

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 7 of the 2006 Act de-reservation or interchangeability of reserved vacancies can only be effected by the Department of Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes upon recording satisfaction that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest; the appointing authority has no power to de-reserve. The Policy letter permitting interchangeability, as restored, is not inconsistent with Section 7, but appellants were not entitled to relief after the long lapse of time and where departmental concurrence was not granted; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • No order as to costs