Vs. State of T.N  INSC 391 (21 July 1994)
R.M. (J) Sahai, R.M. (J) Singh N.P. (J)
1994 SCC (6) 51 JT 1994 (4) 651 1994 SCALE (3)656
have today pronounced judgment in Union of India v. Rajiv Yadav, 'ASI. The
appeal has been allowed, the impugned judgment of the Central Administrative
Tribunal has been set aside and the principles of "cadre allocation"
for reserved candidates have been upheld.
writ petition has been filed by Supriya Sahu who is a Scheduled Caste
candidate. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of Union of India by Mr
V.K. Cherian, Under Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, it has
been stated as under:
in this writ petition Kumari Supriya Sahu has claimed allotment to U.P. cadre,
her home State. Even if the provision made in the principles of cadre
allocation for reserved candidates is upheld by the Supreme Court that will not
automatically entitle Kumari Supriya Sahu for allotment to U.P. cadre. This is
because there is already a candidate belonging to reserved category above her
in the merit list hailing from U.P., whose appointment is pending." 3.In
view of the stand taken by the Union of India no relief can be given to the
petitioner by this Court. We, however, direct the Union of India to consider
the case of the petitioner in accordance with the principles of cadre
allocation for reserved candidates as upheld by this Court in Rajiv Yadav
case'. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.