HARSHENDRA CHOUBISA AND ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

HARSHENDRA CHOUBISA AND ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

The grant of bonus marks to candidates from the same district and rural areas for purposes of public employment selection constitutes discrimination in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, as it is based on artificial and untenable classifications not justified by the objectives of good governance or administrative necessity.

Parties
Appellants: Harshendra Choubisa and Others; Respondents: State of Rajasthan and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals disposed of; High Court judgment modified.
Legal Topics
Reservation/bonus Marks in Public Employment, Equality Before Law, Discrimination in Selection Process
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Employment Reservation/bonus Marks in Public Employment Equality Before Law Discrimination in Selection Process

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harshendra Choubisa and Others

Appellants

State of Rajasthan and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the State can validly provide bonus marks in public employment selection based on residence in a district and rural areas of such district.
  2. 2 Whether the notification granting such bonus marks violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The grant of bonus marks to candidates from the same district and rural areas for purposes of public employment selection constitutes discrimination in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, as it is based on artificial and untenable classifications not justified by the objectives of good governance or administrative necessity.

Court Disposition

Appeals disposed of; High Court judgment modified.

Orders

  • Relief confined to petitioners who challenged the notification; their claims to be reconsidered according to this judgment vis-à-vis appointments made on or after 27.07.2000 or those yet to be appointed.
  • Appointments of Gram Sewaks made up to 26.07.2000 not to be reopened or reconsidered.