SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S.C. Agrawal, S.P. Bharucha and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 1333 of 1998. D/d. 21.7.1998.

Union of India and others - Appellants

Versus

Permanand Singh - Respondent

A. Constitution of India, Articles 15(3), 15(1) and 16(2) - Posts and Telegraphs (Telephone Operators) Recruitment Rules, 1968 - Reservation of woman - Special provision in favour of women, as envisaged in Article 15(3) upheld - Since the rules do not make any provision for reservation of posts for women in the matter of appointment on the posts of Telephone Operators, it was not permissible for the appellants to reserve the posts of Telephone Operators.

[Para 4]

B. Constitution of India, Article 142 - Power of the Supreme Court to "pass such decree or to make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter" - Appointments of female candidates made in violation of Article 15 of the Constitution - Impugned judgment of the Tribunal holding that reservation of 100% posts for women for appointment as Telephone Operators in Patna Telephone Exchange was not permissible affirmed - Exercising power under Article 142 in order to do complete justice in the matter, the impugned judgment of the Tribunal is upheld with a modification that the appointment of female Telephone Operators made on the basis of the impugned advertisement shall not be upset.

[Para 5]

Cases Referred :-

Govt. of A.P. v. P.B. Vijayakumar, (1995) 4 SCC 520 .

ORDER

S.C. Agrawal, J. - This appeal relates to appointment on the post of Telephone Operator in the Patna Telephone Exchange in pursuance of the advertisement that was published in the newspaper Searchlight dated 22-6-1982. As per the said advertisement, all the 40 posts of Telephone Operators in the said Exchange were reserved for female candidates only. The said advertisement was challenged by the respondent by filing a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The said writ petition was transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). By the impugned judgment dated 19-5-1997, the Tribunal has allowed the said application and has quashed the advertisement as well as the appointments made on the basis of the said advertisement on the ground that 100% reservation of seats for women is not permissible under Article 16(4) of the Constitution and that Article 15(3) cannot be invoked to protect such reservation.

2. At the relevant time, recruitment to the post of Telephone Operator was governed by the Posts and Telegraphs (Telephone Operators) Recruitment Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). The said Rules did not contain any provision providing for reservation of any posts for women. Shri P.P. Malhotra, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, submits that in view of clause (3) of Article 15 of the Constitution, it was permissible for the administration to reserve all the posts of Telephone Operators in a particular exchange for women. Shri Malhotra has stated that in Bihar Telephone District there were 1399 male Telephone Operators and 270 female Telephone Operators and that the ratio of female operators was about 9.2 per cent only. Shri Malhotra has submitted that by virtue of Article 15(3) of the Constitution, it was permissible for the administration to reserve all the posts in the Patna Telephone Exchange for female operators.

3. In the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has pointed out that in the absence of any provision in that regard in the Rules, clause (3) of Article 15 of the Constitution, by itself, would not enable the administration to reserve all the posts in a particular telephone exchange for women. The Tribunal has also placed reliance on the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Applications Nos. 2333 and 458 of 1979 wherein a similar reservation of all posts in a telephone exchange for women was struck down. Shri Malhotra has not been able to point out that the said judgment of the Gujarat High Court has been assailed by the Union of India before this Court.

4. We have carefully considered the submissions of Shri Malhotra but we are unable to accept the same. Since the Rules do not make any provision for reservation of posts for women in the matter of appointment on the posts of Telephone Operators, it was not permissible for the appellants to reserve the posts of Telephone Operators in the Patna Telephone Exchange for women only. The decision of this Court in Govt. of A.P. v. P.B. Vijayakumar, (1995) 4 SCC 520 , on which reliance has been placed by Shri Malhotra has no application to the present case. In that case, this Court was dealing with the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules wherein it was provided that in the matter of direct recruitment to a post for which women and men are equally suited, other things being equal, preference be given to women for filling the posts limited to the extent of 30% in each category of OC, BC, SC and ST quota. The said provision was upheld as valid by this Court in view of clause (3) of Article 15 of the Constitution. There is no provision similar to that provision in the Rules. The decision in the case of P.B. Vijayakumar does not, therefore, lend any assistance to the submission of Shri Malhotra.

5. The impugned judgment of the Tribunal holding that reservation of 100% posts for women for appointment on the posts of Telephone Operators in the Patna Telephone Exchange was not permissible has, therefore, to be affirmed and the appeal assailing the said view of the Tribunal has to be dismissed. But having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that there is no competing claim inasmuch as the respondent has not pursued the matter by opposing this appeal in this Court, we are of the opinion that the appointment of the female operators who were so appointed on the basis of the impugned advertisement be not disturbed. Exercising the power of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution in order to do complete justice in the matter, we uphold the impugned judgment of the Tribunal with the modification that the appointment of the female Telephone Operators made on the basis of the impugned advertisement shall not be upset. This appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

6. We place on record our appreciation for assistance rendered by Shri M.S. Ganesh and Shri S.R. Bhat as amicus curiae.

Appeal dismissed.