State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Marriage Cannot Be Perpetuated on Paper When Cohabitation Has Ceased for Decades: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Grant Divorce Despite Wife’s Opposition Ownership of Trucks Does Not Mean Windfall Compensation: Supreme Court Slashes Inflated Motor Accident Award in Absence of Documentary Proof Concealment of Mortgage Is Fraud, Not a Technical Omission: Supreme Court Restores Refund Decree, Slams High Court’s Remand State Reorganization Does Not Automatically Convert Cooperative Societies into Multi-State Entities: Supreme Court Rejects Blanket Interpretation of Section 103 Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court After Admitting Lease, Defendant Cannot Turn Around and Call It Forged—Contradictory Stand at Advanced Trial Stage Impermissible: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Amendment Plea Dismissed Employee Has No Right to Leave Encashment Under Statutory Rules: Punjab and Haryana High Court Section 13 of Gambling Act Is Cognizable — Magistrate Can Take Cognizance on Police Report: Allahabad High Court Clarifies

Reservation Quota Cannot Exceed 20% Once Roster is Fulfilled: PH High Court for Scheduled Castes in Promotions

16 September 2024 2:56 PM

By: Deepak Kumar

On September 5, 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Navdeep Singh and Another vs. State of Punjab and Others, directed the State to strictly adhere to the 20% reservation quota for Scheduled Caste candidates in promotions for Head Teachers. The court emphasized that once the quota is filled, further promotions should be based on merit, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling in R.K. Sabarwal vs. State of Punjab.

The petitioners, Navdeep Singh and another, challenged the promotions to the post of Head Teacher, alleging that the State of Punjab was exceeding the 20% reservation quota for Scheduled Caste candidates. According to the petitioners, the quota had already been fulfilled, yet additional reserved category candidates were being promoted, which they claimed was illegal and arbitrary. The petition relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in R.K. Sabarwal vs. State of Punjab (1995), which mandates that once the reserved category quota is filled, the roster system should stop operating.

The main legal question revolved around the over-promotion of reserved category candidates beyond the 20% reservation quota prescribed by the Punjab Scheduled Castes & Backward Classes (Reservation in Services) Act, 2006. The petitioners contended that once the reserved category quota was fulfilled, further promotions should be based on merit, not reservation.

Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi, presiding over the case, held that the State must strictly comply with the 20% reservation limit for Scheduled Castes. The court noted that of the total 425 Head Teacher posts, 319 were to be filled through promotions, and 64 of those were reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates. The court observed that as of 2016, only 54 Scheduled Caste candidates were promoted, which meant that some reserved posts were still unfilled. However, the court also emphasized that any candidate promoted based on seniority and merit should not be counted towards the reserved quota.

The court ordered the State to complete the promotion process by first determining how many Scheduled Caste candidates were promoted under the reserved quota and ensuring that the 20% limit was not exceeded. The roster system, it ruled, would stop operating once the quota was fulfilled, and further promotions would be based on merit.

Adherence to Reservation Quota: The court reiterated that the 20% reservation for Scheduled Castes must be strictly followed. Once the roster is completed and the reserved quota is filled, the promotions must be made based on merit.

Supreme Court’s Ruling in R.K. Sabarwal: The court heavily relied on the principles set in R.K. Sabarwal vs. State of Punjab (1995), which mandates that reserved category candidates promoted on the basis of merit should not be counted toward the reserved quota.

Backlog Posts: The court directed that the backlog of 42 unfilled reserved posts be reviewed and filled only if the 20% reservation had not already been met.

Protection of Rights: The court balanced the interests of both reserved and unreserved category candidates, ensuring that neither group was given undue advantage or subjected to unfair treatment.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the State of Punjab to strictly adhere to the 20% reservation quota for Scheduled Castes in promotions and ensure that no excess benefit is given to reserved category candidates. The court emphasized that once the reserved quota is fulfilled, further promotions should be based on merit, as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in R.K. Sabarwal.

Date of Decision: September 5, 2024

Navdeep Singh and Another vs. State of Punjab and Others

Latest Legal News

  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:22 PM
Section 13 of Gambling Act Is Cognizable — Magistrate Can Take Cognizance on Police Report: Allahabad High Court Clarifies
  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:20 PM
Dismissed Employee Has No Right to Leave Encashment Under Statutory Rules: Punjab and Haryana High Court
  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:19 PM
After Admitting Lease, Defendant Cannot Turn Around and Call It Forged—Contradictory Stand at Advanced Trial Stage Impermissible: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Amendment Plea
  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:17 PM
Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court
  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:14 PM
Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction
  • by Admin
    16 December 2025 4:13 PM
Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC