AIR 1995 SUPREME COURT 14 ::1994 AIR SCW 3989 ::1994 AIR SCW 4002 ::(1995) 2 CriCJ 408 ::(1994) 4 CurCriR 807 ::1995 CriLR(SC&MP) 48 ::(1995) Mad LJ(Cri) 203 ::1994 (6) SCC 535 ::1994 SCC (L&S) 1265 ::(1994) 3 RecCriR 668 ::1995 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 48 ::(1994) 3 AllCriLR 724 ::1995 BLJR 1 485 ::(1995) 1 ChandCriC 137 ::(1995) 1 EastCriC 487 ::(1994) 2 Ker LT 45 ::(1995) 1 Pat LJR 10 ::(1994) 4 ServLR 547 ::(1994) 3 Crimes 463 ::1994 ALLAPPCAS (Cri) 276 ::1994 (5) JT 54 ::(1994) 6 JT 395 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From C.A.T. - New Delhi)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Kuldip Singh, M. M. Punchhi, K. Ramaswamy , JJJ

Constitution of India , Art.309, Art.16(4)— Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules (1954) , R.5— Cadre allocation - Govt. letter dt. 31-5-1985 - Cl. 2 of it gives preference to SC/ST candidate for allocation to his home State - It does not provide reservation of appointments or Posts - Said principles need not be tested on anvil of Art. 16(4). When a person is appointed to an All India Service, having various State Cadres, he has no right to claim allocation to a State of his choice or to his home State. The Central @page-SC15 Government is under no legal obligation to have options or even preference from the officer concerned. Rule 5 of the Cadre Rules makes the Central Government the sole authority to allocate the members of the service to various cadres. It is not obligatory for the Central Government to frame rules / regulations or otherwise notify "the principles of allocation" adopted by the Government as a policy. The letter dated May 31, 1985 shows that the Central Government has always been having guidelines either in the shape of "limited zonal preferences system" or "Roster System" for the exercise of its discretion under Rule 5 of the Cadre Rules. Simply because the principles of allocation called "Roster System" were not notified, it is no ground to hold that the same are non est and the Central Government cannot foll....