SC to pronounce important verdicts Friday
The Supreme Court will tomorrow pronounce judgements of constitutional importance including the controversial issue of removal of Governors with the change of government at the Centre.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will tomorrow
pronounce judgements of constitutional importance including
the controversial issue of removal of Governors with the
change of government at the Centre.
It will also deliver its verdict on the contentious
issue whether candidates belonging to reserved categories
selected for union civil services on merit should be appointed
against reserved posts or under the general quota.
Both the judgements are to be delivered by a
five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice K G
Balakrishnan who retires on May 11.
Justice Balakrishnan will also be part of the Bench
which will deliver the verdict on the high-profile Ambani gas
While the arguments on the issue of quota in UPSC had
concluded on August 28, 2009, the hearing on removal of
Governors ended a month after.
The controversial issue of removal of Governors with
the change of government at the Centre was raised in 2004 by
the then BJP MP B P Singhal. He had challenged the removal of
Governors of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana and Orissa by the
first UPA government.
The verdict in the UPSC matter assumes significance as
it would have a bearing on the procedure for allotment of
posts adopted by UPSC as well as aggrieved candidates.
Among the various contentious issues, the Bench was to
decide whether reserved category candidates, i.e Other
Backward Castes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, who
are selected on merit and placed in the list of general or
unreserved category candidates could be considered as reserved
category candidates at the time of service allocation.
The focus of the entire matter was Rule 16 (2) of the
Civil Services Examination Rules as amended in 2005 which
mandates that a reserved category candidate selected on merit
as unreserved or general category can be considered as
reserved category for allocation of a post on preferential
However, this rule was held as unconstitutional by the
Madras High Court, leading to filing of appeals against it by
the Centre and aggrieved candidates.