## Facts

- Kerala’s service rules required Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) to pass specified departmental tests to be eligible for promotion to Upper Division Clerk (UDC).
- The State introduced Rule 13-AA (1972), authorizing the government to grant SC/ST employees already in service a time-bound exemption from passing those tests.
- The Governor issued orders granting a two-year exemption and later extending it for additional test cycles.
- Based on the exemptions, 34 SC/ST LDCs who had not passed the tests were promoted to UDC posts on the basis of seniority.
- N.M. Thomas, a non-SC/ST LDC who had passed the tests, was not promoted because the promoted SC/ST employees were senior to him; he challenged Rule 13-AA and the promotions.
- The Kerala High Court held Rule 13-AA and the promotions unconstitutional under constitutional guarantees of equal opportunity and the efficiency requirement for public services.
- The State appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Rule 13-AA and the resulting promotions violated equal opportunity and nondiscrimination guarantees in public employment.
2. Whether SC/ST-based preference must be confined to a specific constitutional provision on reservations, or may be justified within the general equality guarantee through reasonable classification.
3. Whether the temporary exemption from promotion tests was inconsistent with the constitutional requirement to maintain efficiency in administration.
4. Whether the constitutional provision permitting reservations is an “exception” to equal opportunity or a permissible means within equality itself.

## Decision

- The Court reversed the High Court and upheld Rule 13-AA and the exemption orders.
- The Court held that the measures did not violate the guarantees of equal opportunity or the bar on prohibited discrimination.
- The Court held the exemption was a limited relaxation of a qualifying condition, not a reservation of posts.
- The Court concluded the temporary arrangement did not impermissibly impair administrative efficiency, because SC/ST employees remained subject to the testing requirement within an extended period.
- A dissenting view treated the reservations provision as an exception to equal opportunity, but the operative judgment sustained the rule and promotions.

## Legal Principles

- Equal opportunity in public employment permits reasonable classification with a rational connection to a legitimate objective, including measures addressing SC/ST disadvantage and under-representation.
- The constitutional provision authorizing reservations is not necessarily a narrow carve-out from equal opportunity; it may be understood as one method of achieving substantive equality within the equality guarantee.
- Nondiscrimination rules do not bar all consideration of caste status where the Constitution contemplates special measures for SC/ST and the measure is remedial rather than hostile.
- A temporary relaxation of promotion conditions (such as extending time to pass tests) is distinct from reserving a fixed share of posts and can be constitutionally permissible.
- The efficiency requirement in public services allows moderated, time-bound relaxations aimed at enabling disadvantaged groups to progress, so long as the measure does not seriously impair administration and core standards remain operative.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Kerala’s rule permitting temporary test exemptions for SC/ST employees already in service, treating the measure as a constitutionally permissible relaxation to advance substantive equality without unlawfully discriminating against others or negating administrative efficiency.


State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, (1976) 1 S.C.R. 906 (India 1976)