Questions have emerged over alleged violations of SC/ST reservation rules in the Supervisor (Accounts) cadre of the Office of the Accountant General, Tripura, following expansion of sanctioned posts, with complaints reportedly being prepared for national commissions seeking inquiry.
Serious questions have been raised over the alleged implementation of the Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) reservation roster in the Supervisor (Accounts) cadre of the Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Tripura, following an expansion of sanctioned posts in the Central Government office in Agartala.
According to documents and records cited in connection with the matter, the sanctioned strength of the Supervisor (Accounts) cadre was increased from two posts to five posts with effect from January 1, 2021. However, allegations have since emerged that the prescribed post-based reservation roster was not fully implemented following the increase in cadre strength.
Under the Central Government’s 100-point post-based reservation roster, when a cadre consists of five posts, specific roster points are earmarked for reserved categories. Roster Point No. 3 is identified for Scheduled Caste candidates, while Roster Point No. 5 is earmarked for Scheduled Tribe candidates.
The Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), through its Office Memorandum dated June 15, 2018, has clarified the principles governing post-based reservation. The guidelines emphasise that reservation is applicable to posts rather than merely to vacancies and that the roster should represent the entire sanctioned strength of the cadre.
Records reportedly show that one Scheduled Caste officer was holding a post in the cadre as of January 1, 2021. The officer subsequently retired on January 31, 2021. Following the retirement, an SC vacancy corresponding to the reserved roster point reportedly arose.
At the same time, questions have been raised over the alleged non-operationalisation of the Scheduled Tribe roster point after the cadre strength was increased from two to five posts. According to allegations, promotions made after the expansion of sanctioned posts were granted entirely under the Unreserved (UR) category, despite the existence of reserved roster points.
Service-rule experts have pointed out that, if established, such a practice could result in an imbalance in the representation of categories within the cadre and potentially lead to over-representation of the unreserved category. They have stressed that post-based reservation requires every sanctioned post to be accounted for according to the applicable roster.
Under DoPT guidelines, a roster point once identified for a reserved category cannot ordinarily be ignored or dereserved without approval from the competent authority. The replacement principle under post-based reservation also assumes importance when a reserved-category employee retires from a post earmarked for that category.
The issue has also raised questions concerning constitutional safeguards relating to equality and affirmative action. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law, while Article 16(4) enables provisions for reservation for backward classes that are not adequately represented in public services. Article 335 further deals with the claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services while requiring consideration of administrative efficiency.
Observers say that proper maintenance and implementation of reservation rosters becomes particularly important when sanctioned cadre strength is increased through restructuring or expansion. Any failure to identify and operate reserved roster points could potentially affect the promotional opportunities available to eligible SC and ST employees.
Sources indicate that preparations are underway to submit written complaints before the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST). The proposed complaints are expected to seek a detailed examination of the roster, cadre expansion, subsequent promotions and alleged non-implementation of reserved points.
The commissions, if approached, could examine the relevant service records, sanctioned-strength orders, roster registers, promotion records and applicable DoPT instructions before determining whether reservation provisions were correctly followed.
No official response has so far been issued by the concerned office regarding the allegations. Administrative sources, however, maintain that promotion-related procedures are governed by applicable Central Government rules, DoPT instructions and constitutional provisions.
| Also Read: Tripura TET candidates demand urgent publication of merit lists |
The matter could gain wider significance if the concerned commissions take cognizance of the complaints and order an inquiry. Such a development could potentially reinforce the requirement for government offices to strictly maintain and implement post-based reservation rosters whenever cadre strength is expanded or restructured.
For now, the allegations remain subject to verification by the competent authorities, and any determination regarding irregularities would depend on examination of the official records and applicable reservation rules.
