B. N. TIWARI versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
The Supreme Court held that the 1952 'carry forward' rule ceased to exist upon substitution by the 1955 rule, and the 1955 rule was invalidated in Devadasan's case. Therefore, in 1960, there was no carry forward rule, only year-to-year reservations at 12.5% and 5% for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes...
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Petitioner: B. N. Tiwari; Respondent: Union of India
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 10 December 1964
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Reservation in Central Services, Carry Forward Rule, Fundamental Rights
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
B. N. Tiwari
Petitioner
Union of India
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Validity and existence of 'carry forward' reservation rules for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes after Devadasan's case
- 2 Effect of rule substitution on reservation policy
- 3 Petitioner's entitlement based on examination rank without carry forward rule
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the 1952 'carry forward' rule ceased to exist upon substitution by the 1955 rule, and the 1955 rule was invalidated in Devadasan's case. Therefore, in 1960, there was no carry forward rule, only year-to-year reservations at 12.5% and 5% for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively. Even after applying these percentages, the petitioner, based on his rank, was not entitled to appointment.
Court Disposition
Petition dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment