Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2016-03-11 dismissed

Suresh Chand Gautam vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors

Bench: 2 — Dipak Misra

In Brief

Petitioners sought a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to collect quantitative data on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes representation in public services to frame regulations for reservation in promotion with consequential seniority. The Supreme Court held that Articles 16(4-A) and 16(4-B) are enabling provisions conferring discretionary power on the State, not mandatory duties. The State need not make such reservations; when it chooses to do so, it must independently gather necessary data establishing inadequate representation. The Court cannot mandate this data collection as it would constitute impermissible judicial entry into legislative policy-making. Mandamus requires an existing legal right and corresponding duty—neither exist in discretionary enabling provisions. The petitions were dismissed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Constitutional Law Administrative Law Writ Jurisdiction Reservation - Promotion Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Affirmative Action Mandamus Equality of Opportunity Public Employment

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login