Judgment :-

T.S. THAKUR, J.

1. This appeal arises out of an order passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, whereby Writ Petition No.1061 of 2007 filed by the appellant has been dismissed and the appellant's claim for appointment as a Constable in the Haryana Police Department turned down. The High Court has taken the view that since the marks scored by the appellant were less than the marks awarded to the last candidate in the general category, he could make no grievance against his non-selection in that category. The appellant assails that view primarily on the ground that the High Court has failed to notice certain important aspects that render the order unsustainable, in particular the fact that two of the candidates selected in the reserved category having scored marks that were higher than those scored by the last candidate selected in the general category, the said candidates ought to have been selected against vacancies in the general merit category. If that were done, the appellant could be appointed against one of the said vacancies. The factual matrix giving rise to the controversy need be summarized at this stage:

2. A selection process to fill up 100 available posts of Constables in Haryana Police in the District of Sirsa, State of Haryana was undertaken in which the appellant was also a candidate for appointment against one of the vacancies in the reserved category of ESM/BC(B) for ex-servicemen and their dependents. The appellant was put through physical efficiency and other tests and eventually placed at Sr. No.3 in the ESM/BC(B) category. An appointment order was also issued in his favour pursuant whereto he joined the Police Department on 17th August 2001 and was allotted Constabulary No.2/873 in the 2nd Battalion of the Haryana Armed Force.

3. One, Naresh Kumar who had also applied for selection in ESM/BC(B) category and whose name did not figure in the select list filed Civil Writ Petition No.13130 of 2001 in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana challenging the appointment of the appellant mainly on the ground that the said petitioner had a preferential right to an appointment in the ESM/BC (B) category on account of his being an ex-serviceman in comparison to the appellant who being a dependent of an ex-serviceman would stand a chance only if no ex-serviceman was available for appointment. The appellant had in the meantime completed the Basic Training Course of nine months duration, passed out in May 2002 and started discharging the duties attached to the post to which he was appointed. The High Court, all the same, allowed the writ petition filed by Naresh Kumar and by its order dated 10th July 2002 quashed the appointment of the appellant with a direction that the claim of ex-servicemen candidates would have priority over those who are dependents of such ex-servicemen. Consequent upon the said direction, the services of the appellant were terminated in terms of an order dated 31st December 2002, the correctness whereof was questioned by the appellant in CWP No.16287 of 2003. The said petition was eventually dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to file a review petition against the order of the High Court in CWP No.13130 of 2001. A review petition was accordingly filed by the appellant which was disposed of by the High Court by an order dated 10th March 2006 directing the respondents to re-consider the case of the appellant in the general category. Order dated 10th July 2002 passed by the High Court in CWP No.13130 of 2001 was to that extent modified.

4. It was in compliance with the above direction that the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa passed an order on 26th May 2006 declining an appointment to the appellant as a Constable. The order stated that out of eight candidates in BC(B) category the last candidate selected for appointment had scored 27 marks as against 26 marks awarded to the appellant. The order further stated that out of 45 candidates selected in the General category the la