ORDER : 1. On 11th September, 1990, we directed the final hearing of this group of cases to be taken up on 6th November, 1990, in view of the importance and urgency of the matter: No interim order was then made on the stay petitions in view of certain submissions made by learned Attorney General in Court but we left it open to the petitioners who had asked for stay orders to move their applications if and when there was any imminent need for it. 2. Yesterday, Mr. Venugopal, on behalf of the Supreme Court Bar Association and some of the counsel whose petitions for stay are pending consideration when moved, mentioned to the Court that a situation imminent enough had arisen which justified consideration of the stay petitions. Therefore, the Bench which was handling with this matter assembled this morning to hear the stay petitions. 3. We have heard Mr. Venugopal, Mrs. Shyamla Pappu, Mrs. Hingorani, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Mr. Pankaj Kalra, Mr. Singhvi and Mrs. Indra Sawhney, in support of the petitions for stay. Similarly on the other side we have heard learned Attorney General, Mr. A. Subba Rao and Mr. Havanur, in support of their stand that no interim order should be made. 4. The main factor which has led to the pressing of the applications for interim orders is based upon a notification of the Union Public Service Commission in regard to the combined Medical Services Examination of 1991 wherein the last date for making of applications is October 29, 1990. In the body of the notice there is reference to what can be correlated to implementing the impugned Government Notification with regard to the reservation of 27% of vacancies for the category covered by the Government Order. Learned Attorney General has not challenged this aspect factually. An affidavit has been filed before us on behalf of the Union Public Service Commission explaining the prevailing practice as also with reference to the notification in question. It explains the time-frame set by the Commission for the different aspects of the particular recruitment. There is absolutely no dispute that everyone duly qualified is free to make an application. An affidavit has been filed before us on behalf of the Union Public Service Commission explaining the prevailing practice as also with reference to the notification in question. It explains the time-frame set by the Commission for the different aspects of the particular recruitment. There is absolutely no dispute that everyone duly qualified is free to make an application. The question as to whether the benefit of 27% reservation in terms of the Government Order of August 13, 1990, would be applicable is one which will arise for consideration sometime after February, 1991, when the qualifying , examination is scheduled. 5. As everyone qualified to apply irrespective of reservation is free to apply no interim Order with reference to this notification is necessary at present except a clarification that if anything is done which would appear to be contrary to the decision ultimately to be delivered by this Court, the same shall be set right and the recruitment may even be redone from the stage where-alleged undue reservation materially affected the process. 6. Learned Attorney General then stated that identification of the categories to be benefited by the 27% reservation is in progress and .may not be complete by the end of October. Until that is done real implementation of what is alleged to be prejudicial would not occur. 7. Implementation of executive decisions is in the hands of the Government of the day. The question . as to whether such action is constitutional or there is any impediment therein which would make Government order vulnerable is a matter for Court's examination. In these circumstances we do not think we should interfere with the Government's day to day action but Government should also take note of the fact that the matter is pending for judicial consideration and modulate its action taking into consideration the prevailing situation. We intend to say nothing more on that aspect for the present. 8. Lot of emphasis has been laid on either side on the human factor. It was particularly brought to our notice that subsequent to the order of 11th September, 1990, agitation has, spread into every nook and corner of the country and public life has been disturbed; human lives have been last and Government property has been damaged and destroyed. 8. Lot of emphasis has been laid on either side on the human factor. It was particularly brought to our notice that subsequent to the order of 11th September, 1990, agitation has, spread into every nook and corner of the country and public life has been disturbed; human lives have been last and Government property has been damaged and destroyed. While we take notice of it, we are of the view that there is no particular necessity for judicial interference on that sole ground. 9. After we made order on 11th September, 1990, we had appealed to counsel and those who were in the Court room to take note of the fact that the dispute has now come to the apex court and it is necessary that parties and the people who were agitated over this question should maintain a disciplined posture and create an atmosphere where the question can be dispassionately decided by this court. That perhaps has not been appropriately conveyed to the people of the country. We hope and trust that the country has confidence in this institution as the protector of their interest as envisaged in the Constitution and we appeal to the nation that every one does take notice of the fact that this court as the guardian and protector of the rights of citizens shall examine the matter duly and give justice to everyone. There is no justification to be panicky over any situation and if any one's rights are prejudiced in any manner, certainly relief would be available at the appropriate stage and nothing can happen in between which would deter this court from exercising its power in an ' effective manner. We hope the media would help us to carry this appeal to every nook and corner of the country so that there may be a sense of confidence aroused in everyone who is looking forward to making of his or her career according to his/her best of his/her opportunities. 10. We make it clear that the August 13 order does not cover admission into any educational institution and is restricted to these items of recommendations of the Mandal Commission Report with certain modifications. Government shall not without leave of this Court extend the scope of this order of 13th August. 11. This matter in our opinion, involved interpretation of the Constitution. Government shall not without leave of this Court extend the scope of this order of 13th August. 11. This matter in our opinion, involved interpretation of the Constitution. We are, therefore, referring these cases to a Constitution Bench but we direct that the matters shall be listed on the date fixed and all the interim directions to the Registry and to the parties to make the matters ready by that date are reiterated. Registry shall obtain directions from the Hon'ble the Chief Justice*of India. 12. On 11th September, 1990, we had directed that the intervention petitions would be listed on 3rd October, 1990. The Registry has listed some of these matters today. Taking the nature of the dispute into consideration, we direct all applications for intervention which have been handled now, shall stand allowed. Applications for impleadment are also treated as petitions for intervention and are allowed. Interveners shall be entitled for such participation as the rules of this court permit. 13. We hope and trust that our expectation shall not belied and the assurances which we have indicated above shall be helpful to allay apprehensions of the people who are likely to be affected by the implementation of the Government order. The matter shall now stand adjourned to 6th November, 1990. 14. We are happy to notice that when these cases were heard perfect discipline and decorum were maintained by counsel and parties. 15. Before parting with this case for the day, we would like to take note of the position that the agitation which has now been raising is mostly by the students who are preparing for their career. We find from press reports that in tackling or suppressing the movements, the police seem to be using more force than is necessary. Though neither party has raised any contention on this aspect, we would like to make it clear to the Delhi administration and the Police Authorities that due care should be taken and appropriate instructions should be issued to the Police in the field that in tackling with the agitators excess force should not be used and appropriate care, as necessary in the situation and circumstances, should be taken.