All India Ex-Ec Offrs.& Sc Offrs. Welfare
Assn. Vs. Union of India  INSC 482 (20 September 1994)
B.L. (J) Hansaria B.L. (J) Kuldip Singh (J)
1995 SCC Supl. (1) 78 JT 1994 (6) 265 1994 SCALE (4)255
Judgment of the Court was delivered by B.L. HANSARIA, J.- The Released
Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers
(Reservation of Vacancies) Rules, 1971 (for short 'the Rules') came to be
framed by the President of India to compensate the emergency commissioned
officers for the chances they had lost by entering public services during the
time the country needed them. The Rules apply to those who were commissioned
after 1-1 1-1962 but before 10-1-1968 and make certain percentage of reservation
in all Central Civil Services and their seniority, on entering these services,
is determined on the assumption that they entered the same "at the first
opportunity they had after joining the training prior to their Commission or
the date of their Commission".
prayer of the All India ex-Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service
Commissioned Officers' Welfare Association and other petitioners is that the
same benefit should be made available to these categories of persons when they
join the non-reserved posts also.
Kapoor who addressed us on behalf of the aforesaid Association has strenuously
contended that as the object behind the framing of the Rules was to compensate
for the lost opportunity there is no rational basis in classifying the
aforesaid officers in two categories holders of reserved posts and non reserved
posts. According to the learned counsel, such a classification is hit by
Article 14 on the well-accepted principle that a classification to pass the
test of this Article is not only to be founded on intelligible differentia, but
the same must also have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved
i.e. there must be a nexus between the basis of classification and the object
behind the same.
There can be no quarrel with the aforesaid legal proposition; it has become
well entrenched by now. We do not, however, view this matter as one of
classifying the aforesaid ex-servicemen in two categories mentioned by Shri Kapoor.
According to us, a policy decision was taken to give some benefit to those
servicemen who had stood with the people when the country was invaded and had
rendered useful service during the emergency in question. How much benefit and
in what shape it ought to have been given are not matters on which courts can
have any say, these are exclusively for the executive to decide. The courts
come into picture in such policy matters if the same be either illegal or
irrational or were to suffer from procedural impropriety, as reiterated
recently by this Court in TATA Cellular v. Union of India'. We do not find any
such infirmity in the policy at hand.
This is not all. As the recruitment for the reserved post is through separate
method, as stated in para 6(b) of the reply filed on behalf of Respondents 1 and
2 to Writ Petition No. 151 of 1989, there is no possibility of some of the
released officers obtaining reserved posts with the benefit available under the
Rules, and others obtaining non-reserved posts with no benefit visualised by
two types of incumbents have to be taken as belonging to two different
categories; the one having no clash of interest with the other; the one being
denied no benefit available to the other.
(1994) 6 SCC 651 : JT (1994) 4 SC 532 80 5.In view of the aforesaid, we are not
in a position to concede the prayer made in these petitions. They are,
therefore, dismissed. We leave the parties to bear their own costs.