The Supreme Court of India clarified that the reservation in promotion for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with consequential seniority as engrafted under Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B) of the Constitution can be allowed provided the concepts of ‘efficiency’, ‘backwardness’ and ‘inadequacy of representation’ are identified and measured.
The Court said “Article 16(4), therefore, creates a field which enables a State to provide for reservation provided there exists backwardness of a class and inadequacy of representation in employment. These are compelling reasons. They do not exist in Article 16(1). It is only when these reasons are satisfied that a State gets the power to provide for reservation in the matter of employment.”
Hence, the Court held that Rule 8-A of the U.P. Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991 and Section 3(7) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Servants (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, providing reservation in promotion for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with consequential seniority, are invalid and unconstitutional.