The correct interpretation and application of reservation rules and the 2006 Rules for filling vacancies in employment.

These two appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 17.3.2009, whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the respondent Alok Kumar C.W.J.C. No. 16423/2008* has been allowed by setting aside his order of termination. It has to be noted that the prayer in another writ petition of this appellant,• C.W.J.C. No. 1063 of 2009, seeking a direction for his own appointment after setting aside• the appointment of the respondent Alok Kumar, who was the writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 16423/2008* has been rejected.

2. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Umesh Chandra Shiva while assailing the common order in both the writ petitions has contended that once it becomes an admitted fact that the respondent Alok Kumar was a candidate of general category and could not have been appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra in view of there being only three vacancies for the post of Shiksha Mitra in the general category, the other conclusions arrived by the learned Single Judge as with regard to upholding the appointment of respondent Alok Kumar cannot be sustained.

3. Per contra Mr. Sudhir Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Alok Kumar has submitted that once this Court would go into the respective details of selection on the post of Shiksha Mitra, it would automatically discover that Alok Kumar was the third candidate of general category, inasmuch as, one Laxman Kumar Pankay was the candidate of most backward category who could not have been appointed against the post of general category. He would therefore, contend that the order of the learned Single Judge should not be interfered as it has done substantial justice between the parties.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court the answer to the propositions raised above gets clear from paragraph-10 of the counter affidavit filed by the State, wherein it has been stated as follows:-

"That for filling the vacancies, the reservation roster was to be followed according to which there were three seats for the general male candidates category. It is needful to submit here for filling the general male catogory seats, it was essential to prepare a panel of all the candidates, from which three highest weightage holder candidates should have been selected. But during the enquiry, it was found that erroneously the selectors (panchayat) put the highest weightage holder candidate Sri Lakshman Kumar Pankay in the Most Backward Class Category. This candidate should have been in the general category list because he has the highest weightage of 22. The other two qualifying general category (male) candidates were Sri Amrit Kumar Singh and Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra having the weightage of 19 and 17 respectively. The petitioner Sri Alok Kumar Singh comes at the 4th place having the weightage of 15 and thus his selection was considered as a wrong selection and there were only three seats for the general male category."

From the reading of the aforementioned paragraph two things are clear, namely that there were in all five vacancies for the male candidates out of which three were meant for general category and two for the reserved category. Admittedly Laxman Kumar Pankay who had applied for the said post treating himself to be the candidate of reserved category and availing the benefit of age relaxation for candidates of reserved category had secured highest marks and weightage points, being 22 among all the candidates. Once this fact is beyond any dispute, the selection and appointment of Laxman Kumar Pankay had to be made only in general category which in turn could have left only next two vacancies for general category and as it has been explained in the counter affidavit, these two had gone to Amrit Kumar Singh and Pankaj Kumar Mishra having secured weightage of 19 and 17 weightage points respectively. The weightage point of Alok Kumar the contesting respondent being only 15, he could not and should not have been therefore