<div align="justify">The Supreme Court sought the Karnataka government’s response on a plea by BBMP officials who contended that their promotions were stalled following the apex court's February 9 judgement.<br /><br />The apex court's verdict had called upon all departments/ employers in the state not to effect promotions on the strength of ‘The Karnataka Determination Of Seniority of the Government Servants Promoted on the Basis Of Reservation Act (to the Posts in the Civil Services of the State) Act, 2002’.<br />It had declared the provisions of the Act with respect to doing away with the 'catch up' rule and providing consequential seniority to SCs/STs in promotions against roster points, as ultra vires of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.<br /><br />The petitioners, comprising first division assistants (FDA), second division assistants (SDA), and health inspectors, challenged the validity of a circular issued on March 22 directing all departments not to effect any promotion in view of the apex court verdict.<br /><br />In their plea made by advocate Balaji Srinivasan, the petitioners, belonging to the general category, contended that they were to gain from the judgement as SCs/STs, who were promoted in contravention of the 'catch up' rule, were not entitled to consequential seniority.<br /><br />On their contention, a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta issued notice to the state government, seeking its response within four weeks.<br /><br />Among other grounds, the petitioners claimed that in spite of the directions contained in circular, the government promoted Dr Sandeep Dave and C M Lakshmi Narayana, both lAS officers, from the post of junior scale to the senior scale. Thus, there is a contravention to their fundamental rights of the equality before law and equal protection of law under Article 14 of the Constitution.<br /><br />“The petitioners are on the verge of retirement and due for promotion; if the circular is implemented, the promotion and consequential benefits which they are legally entitled to, will be adversely affected and eventually their right to promotion will fade away owing to the failure of the respondents (government) to enact a state law as per the constitutional scheme,” they said.<br /><br />The petitioners had challenged the Karnataka High Court’s order which dismissed their plea on May 5. The high court relied upon the state government's plea that its review petition against the February judgement was pending before the apex court.</div>
<div align="justify">The Supreme Court sought the Karnataka government’s response on a plea by BBMP officials who contended that their promotions were stalled following the apex court's February 9 judgement.<br /><br />The apex court's verdict had called upon all departments/ employers in the state not to effect promotions on the strength of ‘The Karnataka Determination Of Seniority of the Government Servants Promoted on the Basis Of Reservation Act (to the Posts in the Civil Services of the State) Act, 2002’.<br />It had declared the provisions of the Act with respect to doing away with the 'catch up' rule and providing consequential seniority to SCs/STs in promotions against roster points, as ultra vires of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.<br /><br />The petitioners, comprising first division assistants (FDA), second division assistants (SDA), and health inspectors, challenged the validity of a circular issued on March 22 directing all departments not to effect any promotion in view of the apex court verdict.<br /><br />In their plea made by advocate Balaji Srinivasan, the petitioners, belonging to the general category, contended that they were to gain from the judgement as SCs/STs, who were promoted in contravention of the 'catch up' rule, were not entitled to consequential seniority.<br /><br />On their contention, a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta issued notice to the state government, seeking its response within four weeks.<br /><br />Among other grounds, the petitioners claimed that in spite of the directions contained in circular, the government promoted Dr Sandeep Dave and C M Lakshmi Narayana, both lAS officers, from the post of junior scale to the senior scale. Thus, there is a contravention to their fundamental rights of the equality before law and equal protection of law under Article 14 of the Constitution.<br /><br />“The petitioners are on the verge of retirement and due for promotion; if the circular is implemented, the promotion and consequential benefits which they are legally entitled to, will be adversely affected and eventually their right to promotion will fade away owing to the failure of the respondents (government) to enact a state law as per the constitutional scheme,” they said.<br /><br />The petitioners had challenged the Karnataka High Court’s order which dismissed their plea on May 5. The high court relied upon the state government's plea that its review petition against the February judgement was pending before the apex court.</div>
