Holding

The clarification treating the university as a unit and applying reservation by clubbing single posts and using the roster is constitutionally valid and in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Reservation Act.

Summary

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court judgment that declared a government clarification on reservation in university recruitment invalid. The clarification treated the University of Allahabad and its colleges as a single unit for applying the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, and required the fusion of single posts with a roster to meet reservation percentages. The Supreme Court held that the Act expressly covers appointments in state‑run educational institutions and that the clarification is consistent with its provisions, particularly Sections 2(c), 3(1) and 3(5). It directed that vacancies be advertised with clear indication of reserved seats, that isolated posts be clubbed and the roster applied, thereby ensuring equality of opportunity for SC, ST and OBC candidates. The Court set aside the High Court order, modified the directions, and disposed of the appeal in favour of the State.

Issues considered

Whether the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 applies to recruitment in universities and colleges owned or aided by the State.
Whether a clarification treating the university/college as a single unit and fusing single posts for reservation complies with the Act.
Whether reservation must be indicated subject‑wise in advertisements or can be applied on a total‑post basis with a roster.
Interpretation of Section 2(c) and Section 3(1), 3(5), 3(6) of the Act in the context of academic appointments.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 14, s. Article 15(1), s. Article 16(1), s. Article 335, s. Article 38, s. Article 46, s. Article 51A(h)
Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994s. 2(c), s. 3, s. 4

Subjects

reservationscheduled castesscheduled tribesother backward classesuniversity recruitmentpublic serviceaffirmative actionrosterfusion of postsUttar Pradesh Actequality of opportunity

Judgment

A STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
v.
DR. DINA NATH SHUKLA AND ANR.

JANUARY 31, 1997
B
(K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.]

Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994: Sections 2(c), 3
and 4.
c
Service law-Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes-University of Allahabad--Recruitment for Professors, Readers and
Lecturers-Notification by Govemment-Clarification that for recruitment to
the posts of Professors, Readers and Lecturers, University or College is to be
D treated as a unit and the recruitment would be made applying the rule of
reservation for the Dalits, Tribes and OBCs in respect of all the posts-Chal- -<.
lenge to Notification-High Court held the notification invalid-Appeal by
State-Held the Act gives practical content to implement the constitutional
mandate of equality of opportunity and status to the Dalits, T:ibes and OBCs
in the matter of appointment to a public service or a post under the State of
E f!.P. including an appointment in a university or educational institution-The
enforcement of the Act hinges upon logistic interpretation and not on legalistic
orientation; pragmatic and not pedantic approach so that all candidates gets
equality of opportunity to hold an office or post under the State-The Act .is
applicable when advertisement for direct recruitment to any of the posts or
F services in the University is issued-The rule of reservation should be applied
for recruitment in each service, post, grade or cadre as per the percentage
prescribed in sub-section (1) of Section 3--University/educational institution
should work out the posts before hand and to make recntitment according-
ly-Advertisement inviting applications must specifY the reserved vacancies
subjectwise--lf there is any single post of Professor, Reader or Lecturer in
G each f acuity, discipline, speciality or super-speciality which cannot be reserved
for reserved candidates, it should be clubbed, roster applied and be made
--
available for the reserved fandidates in tem1s of Section 3(5) of the Act-Even
if there exists any isolated post, rule of rotation by application of roster should
be adopted for appointmenr-For achieving the said object, the Vice-Chan-
H cellar would ensure that single posts in each category are clubbed since
750
STATE v. DR. D.N. SHUKLA 751
admittedly all the posts in each of the categories of Professors, Readers, or A
* Lecturers carry the same scale ofpa~Therefore, their fusion is constitutional
and permissible-The Vice-Chancellor should apply the rnle of rotation and
the roster as envisaged under sub-section (5) of Section 3-fi'resh advertise-
ment to be made and selection to be done accordingly.

Constitution of India 1950: Articles 14, 15(1), 16(1), 38, 46, 51A(h) B
and 335.

-- )>
Social equality-'-Dalit Tribes and other weaker sections-Duty to
protect interests of

R.K. Sabharwal and Ors. v. The State of Punjab & Ors., [1995] 2 SCC C
745; Union of India & Anr. v. Madhav S/o Gajanan Chaubal & Anr., JT
(1996) 9 SC 320 and br. Suresh Chandra Venna & Ors. v. The Chancellor,
Nagpur University & Ors., [1990] 4 SCC 55, referred to.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 732 of D
N97.
•
From the Judgment and Order dated 3.5.96 of the Allahabad High
Court in C.M.W.P. No. 12592 of 1995.

Rakesh Dwivedi, K. Misra and R.B. Misra for the Appellant. E
P.P. Rao, Aseem Mehrotra, AP. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey and Ashok
Bhushan for the Respondents.

The following Order of the Court was delivered :
F
Leave granted. We have heard the counsel on both sides.

This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Al-
lahabad High Court, made on 3.5.1996 in CMWP No. 12592 of 1995. The

- legislature of Uttar Pradesh enacted the frttar Pradesh Public Services
(Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward G
Classes) Act, 1994 (for short, the 'Act') Advertisement was issued by the
University of Allahabad on January 30, 1995 inviting applications from all
eligible persons for posts of Professors, Readers and Lecturers including
the posts reserved for Scheduled Castes (for short, the 'Dalits'), Scheduled
Tribes (for short, the 'Tribes) and Other Backward Classes (for short, the H
'
~
752 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 1 S.C.R.

A 'OBCs). A clarification was issued by the Government on April 19, 1995
stating that for recruitment. to the posts of Professors, Readers and Lec-
turers, University or College is treated as a unit and the recruitment would
be made applying the rule of reservation for the Dalits, Tribes and OBCs
in respect of all the posts. That came to be questioned in the writ netition.
B The Division Bench has held that the said notification was bad in law. Thus,
this appeal by special leave.

Shri Rakesh Dwivedi, learned Advocate General, has contended that
the view of the High Court is not correct in law. As most of the subjects
there are single posts of Professor, Reader or Lecturers. in the Univer-
C sity/College and if recruitment is made to each single post, there would be
total prohibition on application of rule of reservation for the Dalits, Tribes
and OBCs, therefore, for making appointment by direct recruitment to the
posts/services, the instructions came to be issued. The Government, there-
fore, had clarified that entire University/College should be taken as a unit
D for the purpose of recruitment to the posts of Professors, Readers and
Lecturers ~d the posts should be fused as three separate categories for -<. ..
application of the rule of reservation. The clarification issued by the
Government is, therefore, consistent with the provisions of the Act. He, in
particular, makes reference to Section 2(c)(iv) read with Section 3(5) of
E the Act.

Shri P.P. Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents,
on the other hand, contended that the advertisement was issued for sub-
jectwise recruitment in the University and applying the rule of reservation
F the subjects in which the posts would be reserved for Dalits, Tribes and
OBCs were specified. The Government instructions, on the other hand,
would create ambiguity as to which of the posts are to be reserved for
Dalits, Tribes, OBCs and which are meant for general candidates. If the
subjectwise reservation is provided for, everyone would know which vacan-
cy is available to the general candidate or to Dalits, Tribes and OBCs. If
. G there is only one post available for recruitment in a given faculty/cadre,
then rule of rotation as provided in Section 3(5) of the Act would be
applied so that rule of reservation would be effectuated, property imple-
-
mented and what is more, candidates would b.e in a position to know to
which post he/she would be entitled to apply for and seek recruitment in
H accordance with the qualifications prescribed for and possessed by the
STATE v. DR. D.N. SHUKLA 753
respective candidates. A

We think that the stand taken and the contention raised by Shri P.P.
Rao, learned senior counsel, is correct and merits acceptance. It is seen
that Section 2( c) of the Act defines "Public Services and Posts" to mean
service in connection with the affairs of the State and includes services and
posts in any educational institu~ion owned and controlled by the State B
Government or which receives grant-in-aid from the State Government,
including a University established by or under a Uttar Pradesh Act, except
-- ·y.._ in educational institution established and administered by minorities
referred to in clause (1) of Article 30 of the Constitution.. Section 3
postulates application of the rule of reservation and reads thus : c
"3. Reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes
and other Backward Classes. - (1) In public services and posts,
there shall be reserved at the state of direct recruitment, the
following percentages of vacancies to which recruitment are to be
made in accordance with the roster referrer\ to in sub-section (5) D
>· in favour of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes and other backward classes of citizens -

(a) in the case of Schedule Castes Twenty one per cent;
(b) in the case of Scheduled Tribes Two per cent; E
(c) in case of other Backward classes twenty seven per
of citizens cent.

Provided that the reservation under clause ( c) shall not apply to
the category of other backward classes of citizens specified in
p,
Schedule· II.

(5) The State Government shall, for applying the reservation under
sub-section (1), by a notified order, issue a roster which shall be
continuously applied till it is exhausted."

Rest of the sub-sections of Section 3 are not relevant; hence omitted.
G

Article 46 of the Constitution enjoins that educational and economic
interest of the Dalits, Tribes and other weaker sections shall be promoted
by the State with special care of the Dalits and Tribes. They shall be
protected from social injustice and all forms of exploitation. Article 38 H
754 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 1 S.C.R.

A envisages that the State shall strive to promote welfare of the people by
securing and protecting, as effectively as it may, a social order in which
justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of
the national life; in particular, to minimise the inequalities in income and
endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities,
B not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of people residing
in different areas or engaged in different vocations. The Preamble of the
Constitution which derives source of power from "We the people of India",
i.e. Bharat, envisions an egalitarian social order to. integrate all the people
with equality of status, dignity of person and fraternity as a united Bharat
and providing them socio-economic justice, equality of opportunity and
c status and dignity of person. It is well settled legal position that Preamble
is part of the Constitution and is the basic structm e of the Constitution.
Every citizen is born equal but get chained within impregnable walls of
social, sectional and religious barriers and is made victim of discrimination
. and denuded of human rights, Articles 14, 15(1) and 16(1) banish all
D barriers of discrimination on grounds of religion, race sex, sect, caste, place
of birth or any of them.

When there is clash of interests and competing claims there is a
craving for equality of opportunity amongst the people and for emanicipa-
E tion from the pangs of absolute prohibition, Articles 15(2) to (4), 16(4) &
4(a) read with the Directive Principles, poured forth practical content,
softened tile rigour of legal equality and given practical content of equality
in opportunity resulting through distributive justice in favour of unequals
to hold an office or post under the State in the democratic governance.
These Articles give power to the State to make positive discrimination in
F favour of the disadvantaged, in particular the Dalits and Tribes, Socio-
economic empowerment secures them dignity of person and equality of
status. Appointment to an office or post gives opportunity to have equality
of status and dignity of person. The object thereby is to provide socio-
economic equality. Social equality gets realised through facilities and op-
G portunities given to them to live with dignity and equal status in the society.
Economic equality also gives socio-economic empowerment as a measure
to improve excellence in every walk of life. Article 51A(h) enjoins on every
citizen to develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and
reform, and charges the citizens to promote harmony, spirit of common
H brotherhood transcending all social, religious, regional and linguistic bar-
STATEv. DR.D.N.SHUKLA 755

riers; Article 51AG) enjoins the citizens to strive towards excellence in all A
spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly
rises to higher level of endeavour and achievement. Equal opportunity of
appointment to a post or office is available to all citizens and legitimately
and constitutionally entitles them to consider their claims for employ-
ment/appointment to an office or post. There are many a-;pirants for a few B
posts/offices which generates spirit of competition. Article 335 mandates
the State that in the field of competition, the claims of the Dalits and Tribes
shall be taken into consideration consistently with the maintenance of
efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and
posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State.
c
Thus Article 335 read with Articles 46, 38 and 16 would give the
socio-economic empowerment to the Dalits and Tribes and rule
of reservation in the matter of appointment to a service or post
.. under the State is part of the constitutional scheme as a positive D
facility and opportunity available to them and where it is extended
to OBCs., they too get opportunity to strive to improve excellence
in a service or a post in which he or she gets appointment. In a
democracy governed by rule of law, every segment of the society
is entitled to a share in the governance of the country. Permanent E
bureaucracy is a facet of our democratic governance and integral
scheme of the Constitution. Recruitment to a post or an office
under the State is governed by the Constitution, law and the rules
made under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution or ad-
ministrative instructions in the absence of statutory rules. Protec-
tive discrimination has been upheld by this Court. It connotes F
mitigating absolute equality to achieve equality in favour of the
disadvantaged segments of the society. The Act gives practical
content to implement the constitutional mandate of equality of
opportunity and status to the Dalits, Tribes and OBCs. in the
matter of appointment to a public service or a post under the State G
of U .P. including an appointment in a university or educational
institution. In R.K Sabha1wal & Ors. v. The State of Punjab & Ors.,
[1995] 2 SCC 745, a Constitution Bench of this Court had con-
sidered and held reservation in promotion as per the roster as valid
and consistent with Articles 16(1) and 14 of the Constitution. It H
756 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 1 S.C.R.

A was also held that the promotion in accordance 'Yith the roster is
valid. The reserved candidates promoted on merit should not be
put in the roster points reserved for them but be treated as general
candidates. Only candidates selected under the reserved quota
should be appointed as per the roster point to the post ear-marked
B for the reserved candidates. In Union of India & Anr. v. Madhav
S/o Gajanan Chaubal & Anr., JT (1996) 9 SC 320, a Bench of three Co

Judges, had held in para 9 that the reservation could be provided
even to the isolated post on the basis of rule of rotation. Extension
of reservation in such cases· is not unconstitutional. On the other
C hand, such scheme provides for and facilitates the Dalits and
Trib~s being considered for promotion to hold single post consis-
tent with equality of opportunity on par with others. Therefore, it
was held that the rule of rotation and the roster point in filing up
the vacancy that has arisen in the single post sought to be filled
D up with the reserved candidates, is not violative of Article 16(1)
or 14 of the Constitution.

Thus, it could be seen that even in the services and posts in connec-
-
tion with the affairs of the State including services and posts in all educa-
tional institutions, owned, controlled/maintained by the State or which
E receive grant-i11-aid from the Government including a University estab-
lished by or under the U.P. Act, the Act is applicable and when advertise-
ment for direct recruitment to any of the posts or services in the University'·-
is issued, the rule of reservation should be applied for recruitment in each
servic~, post, grade or cadre as per the percentage prescribed in sub-sec-
F tion (1) of Section 3 in compliance with sub-Sections (2) to (4) and (6) to
(7); so also rule of rotation as per the roster adumbrated in sub-section (5)
of Section 3 of the Act. Thereby it would be clear that while issuing any
advertisement for direct recruitment to fill up any post or service in any
grade or cadre in the University/educational institution established under
G the U.P. Act, the university/educational institution should work out the
posts before hand and to make recruitment accordingly, it is seen that in
the present case the advertisement specified various posts subjectwise and
the vacancies were reserv_ed for general candidates, Dalits, Tribes and
OBCs. Of course, it is not clear whether it is as per roster. It is true, as
H contended by the learned Advocate General that if there is only one post
STATEv. DR.D.N.SHUKLA 757
in cadre/Faculty, be it a post of professor, Reader or Lecturer, necessarily, A
all such single posts carrying the same scale of pay are required to be

- clubbed and the roster applied to such single post in terms of Section 3(5)
of the Act. When such a fusion is and in fact should be worked out, and
roster is applied, necessarily advertisement should .be issued inviting ap-
plications for recruitment to the posts. The University is required to ear- B
mark the posts in the roster meant for general category or Dalits, Tribes
or OBCs. so that every qualified candidate would apply for and seek
selection in accordance with law. In this behalf, sub-section (6) of Section
3 amplifies the general law that the candidates who had applied for
recruitment for the posts earmarked as per Section 3(1), if selected on C
merit in open competition with general candidates, then they shall not be
adjusted against reserved vacancies. Sub-section (-6) of Section 3 reads .as
under:

"If a person belonging to any of the categories mentioned in
sub-section (1) gets selected on the basis of merit in an open D
competition with general candidates, he shall not be adjusted
against the vacancies reserved for such category under sub-section·.
(1)."

In a case where there are more than one post available in the same E
faculty in the cadre of Professor, Reader or Lecturer, as the case may be,
necessarily and per force, the advertisement should also be made sub-
jectwise applying Section 3(1) & (5) of the Act. On selection, the can-
didates appointed should be fitted in that behalf as per the roster
maintained by the University/educational institution. Thus, all eligible can-
didates, be they general or reserved, would get equal opportunity to apply
F
for and seek selection and recruitment in accordance with law and the
Rules. In adjudging the constitutionality of the scheme or rule of reserva-
tion, what is required to be kept at the back of the mind is the equality
and ·adequacy of representation as per the percentage prescribed by the
rules/administrative instructions. The enforcement of the Act hinges upon G
logistic interpretation and not on legalistic orientation; pragmatic and not
pedantic approach so that all candidates get equality of opportunity to hold
an office or post under the State. Care should also be taken to ensure that
equal opportunity for selection and appointment is available to all can-
didates in all faculties, discipline, speciality and super-speciality and in H
758 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 1 S.C.R.

A each cadre/grade/service so that equality is spread out and no one category
gains monopoly or is pushed into one category, grade or service.

In Dr. Suresh Chandra Venna & Ors. v. The Chancellor, Nagpur
University & Ors., [1990] 4 SCC 55 instead of making subjectwisc recruit-
ment, an advertisement in respect of total of 77 posts including 13 posts of
B
professors, 29 posts of Readers and 35 posts of Lecturers were issued and
recruitment was sought to be made. When it was questioned, this Court
tested the principle on the anvil of equality and fairness of procedure
posing the question thus :

c "Is non-reserving the posts of University teachers subjectwise in
the employment notice a breach of letter and spirit of reservation
policy contained in Section 77-C read with Section 57 of the Act?"

This Court had laid down in paras 10 to 12 thus :
D
As regards the first question, we have narrated earlier the
method which was adopted by the University for reserving the
posts. It announced the posts categorywise as Professors, Readers
and Lecturers in different subjects and made a blanket declaration
E that 6 of the posts of Professors, 12 of the posts of Readers and
16 of the posts of Lecturers would be reserved for backward casts.
Neither the University nor the candidates knew at that time as to
for which of the subjects and in what number the said posts were
reserved. The result was that the candidates belonging to the
)..
reserved category in particular, who wanted to apply for the
F reserved posts did not know for which of the posts they could apply
and whether they could apply at all for the posts in the subjects in
which they were qualified. That this could be the expected conse-
quence of such an employment notice can legitimately be inferred
and need not be and indeed cannot be, demonstrated by evidence
G of what actually happened, for there may be a number of can-
didates who on account of the said uncertainty might to taken a
chance. What is further, the selection committees which were
appointed to interview that candidates for the respective posts did
not also know whether they were interviewing the candidates for
H reserved posts or not, and to assess merits of the candidates from
STATE v. DR. D.N. SHUKLA 759
the reserved category as such candidates. The contention advanced A

..
(
on behalf of the appellants that the selection committees even
without knowing to the candidates from the reserved category and,
therefore, it cannot be said that any injustice had resulted to them
is without merit. In the first instance, the contention proceed on
the footing that all those belonging to the reserved category who B
waned to apply for all. the said posts had done so even without
knowing that the concerned posts were reserved. Secondly, it also
presumes that all eligible candidates from unreserved category had
applied for the posts without knowing whether the posts were
reserved or not. The possibility that many eligible candidates C
belonging to both reserved and unreserved categories might not
have taken the risk and chosen to gamble cannot be ruled out. This
argument further ignores the fact that the suitability of a candidate
from a reserved category to the particular post has to be adjudged
by taking into consideration various factors and the desire result D
cannot be obtained by merely giving uniform weightage marks to
the candidates concerned which was the only method followed by
the selection committees while selecting the candidates. Further,
there is nothing on record to show that this method of giving
weightage to the candidate was not followed in respect of reserved E
category candidates even if they had not applied for the post in
the reserved seats. What is more, there is also nothing on record
to show whether any candidate belonging to the reserved category
had applied for a particular post in a reserved seat, without the
prior knowledge that the post was reserved. It is, therefore, difficult
to understand as to how the selection committees proceeded to F
give weightage to the candidates without knowing whether they
had applied for reserved or non-reserved seats. What is more
objectionable in the procedure was that its Executive Council
... proceeded to classify the posts in different subjects between
reserved and non-reserved posts after the lists of selected can- G
didates were received from different selection committees. This
method was open to an obvious objection since it gave a scope to
eliminate unwanted selected candidates at that stage. Whether it
occurred in the present case or not is immaterial for testing the
validity and the propriety of the method followed by the university. H
760 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 1 S.C.R.

A As has been stated earlier, in fact, after the receipt of the list of
selected candidates not only the Executive Council constituted yet

B
another committee to decide which of the subjectwise posts should
be reserved or not but the Executive Council also decided that
although candidates for 47 posts were selected only 30 of the posts
were set apart although the candidates were selected for them, and
-
they were so set apart for being filled in afresh by candidates
belonging to the reserved category. Interestingly, however, the
employment notice issued subsequently for these posts mentioned
reservations postwise (subjectwise).

c According to us, the word "post" used in the context has a
relation to the faculty, discipline, or the subject for which it is
created. When, therefore, reservations are required to be made "in
posts", the reservations have to be postwise,.i.e. subjectwise. The
mere announcement of the number of reserved posts is no better
D than inviting applications for P()Sts without mentioning the subjects
for which the posts are advertised. When, therefore, Section
57(4}(a) requires that the advertisement or the employment notice
would indicate the number of reserved posts, if any, it implies that
the employment noJ:ice cannot be vagtie .and has to indicate the
specific post, i.e., the subject in ,which the post is vacant and for
E which the applications are invited from the candidates belonging
to the reserved class. A non-indication of the post in this manner
itself defeats the purpose for which the applications are invited
from the reserved category candidates and consequently negates
the object of the reservation policy. That this is also the intention
F of the legislature is made clear by Section 57(4)( d) which requires
the selection committees to interview and adjudge the merits of
each candidate and recommend him or her for appointment to
"the general posts:" and "the reserved posts.", if any, advertised.

A support was also sought to be derived by the appellants to
G their contention from the policy of reservation as enunciated in
Government Resolution dated March 30, 1981 wherein instructions
are issued in the matter in exercise of the power conferred on the
Government under Section 77 (c) of the Act."

H The instructions issued by the Government were extracted and to
STATE v. DR. D.N. SHUKLA 761
avoid confusion in understanding the provisions of the Act, the instructions A
were explained and stated thus :

"....... similarly, a:t any given time of recruitment to the teaching
posts, only the total number of reserved vacancies and the sections
from which they are to be filled in should be determined. It would
B
be enough if the required percentage is fulfilled as a whole and
not with reference to any particular post. If the reserved vacancies
cannot be filled, then so many posts as cannot be filled in, may be
kept vacant for six months and should be again advertised thrice.
If, even after re-advertising the posts three times, suitable can-
didates belonging to the reserved category do not become avail- c
able, they may be filled in by candidates belonging to the open
category."

This Court had further held thus :
D
•• "It is common knowledge that the vacancies in posts in different
subjects occur from time to time according to the exigencies of the
circumstances and they arise unequally in different posts. There
may not be vacancies in one or some posts whereas there may be
a large number of vacancies in other posts. In such circumstances,
E
it is not possible to comply with the minimum reservation percent-
age of 34 vis-a-vis each post. It is for this reason that the resolution
states that although minimum percentage of reserved posts may
not be filled in one or some posts, it will be enough if in that year
it is filled in taking into consideration the total number of appoint-
F
ments in all the posts. This, however, does not absolve the appoint-
ing 'authority from advertising in advance the vacancies in each
post and the number of posts in such vacancies meant for the
reserved category, and inviting applications from the candidates
belonging to the reserved and unreserved categories with a clear
statement in that behalf. In fact, the overall minimum percentage G
has to be kept in mind, as stated in the resolution, at the time of
issuing the employment notice or the advertisement as the case
may be.

What is material from our point of view in this case is to point out H
762 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 1 S.C.R.
A that even the Karnataka Full Bench has taken the view that
generally reservation has to be cadrewise and subjectwise. It was
also a case of the filling in of the vacancies in teaching posts in a
University."

Thus, it could be seen that if the subjectwise recruitment is adopted
B
in each service or post in each cadre in each faculty, discipline, speciality
or super-speciality, it would not only be clear to the candidates who seek
recruitment but also there would not be an over-lapping in application of
the rule of reservation to the service or posts as specified and made
applicable by Section 3 of the Act. On the other hand, if the total posts
c are advertised without subjectwise specifications, in every faculty, dis-
cipline, speciality or super-speciality, it would be difficult for the candidate
to know as to which of the posts be available either to the general or
reserved candidates or whether or not they fulfil or qualify the require-
ments so as to apply for a particular post and seek selection. As indicated
D · earlier, if there is any single post of Professor, Reader or Lecturer in each
faculty, discipline, speciality or super-speciality which cannot be reserved
for reserved candidates, it should be clubbed, roster applied and be made
available for the reserved candidates in terms of Section 3(5) of the Act.
-<-

Even if there exists any isolated post, rule of rotation by application of
E roster should be adopted for appointment. For achieving the said object,
the Vice-Chancellor, who is responsible authority under Section 4 to
enforce the Act, would ensure that single posts in each category are
clubbed since admittedly all the posts in each of the categories ur Profes-
sors, Readers or Lecturers carry the same scale of pay. Therefore, their
fusion is constitutional and permissible. The Vice-Chancellor should apply
F
the rule of rotation and the roster as envisaged under sub-section (5) of
Section 3. The advertisements are required to be issued so that the
reserved and the general candidates would apply for consideration of their
claims for recruitment in accordance therewith. This interpretation would
subserve and elongate constitutional objective and public policy of socio- -.
G economic justice serving adequacy of representation in a service or post,
grade or cadre as mandated and envisaged in Articles 335 and 16(4) read
with Articles 14 and 16(1), Preamble, Article 38 and Article 46 of the
Constitution and aII other cognate provisions.

H This .ratio is consistent with the law laid down by this Court in
STATE v. DR. D.N. SHUKLA 763
Madhav's case as elaborated earlier. A
The law is declared accordingly. The Vice-Chancellor should work

- out the details, make fresh advertisement and have the selection done in
accordance with law and appointments made accordingly. The directions
issued by the High Court are modified accordingly.
B
The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

T.N.A. Appeal disposed of

...