The central legal point established is that the petitioner's eligibility for promotion and reservation rules under Rule 24(A)(3) were crucial in determining the illegality of the reversion.

J.C. Verma,, J.-The petitioner who is Scheduled Caste is also B.E. in Electrical was selected by the Public Service Commission as Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in July 1991 vide Annexure- 1. He is confirmed Assistant Engineer. As per the seniority of the Assistant Engineers (Electrical) as published on 4.1999, his seniority No. was 17. On the recommendations made by the DPC held on 7.3.2000 in terms of Rule 24 (A) of the Rajasthan Service of Engineers (B & R Branch) Rules, 1954 (here-in-after called the Rules), the petitioner was promoted against the quota of 1999-2000 on the basis of seniority cum merit on 30.3.2000 vide Annexure-3, ever since he was working continuously as Executive Engineer (Electrical) in Public Works Department. He was reverted vide order dated 10.7.2000 to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) on the ground that no post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) was available and being the junior most, he could not be retained. A copy of the reversion order is attached as Annexure-4.

2. The petitioner submits that the order of reversion is illegal and challenges on the ground; (1) that there were 10 vacancies of the Executive Engineer available and as per roster for the category of Scheduled caste, he was entitled to be retained in service on the roster point either at roster point 1 or at roster point 7 as there was no other Scheduled Caste available for holding the post; (2) that having been regularly promoted by the DPC, no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before reverting him; (3) that generally once the Executive Engineer is promoted by the DPC, he is never reverted and such officer is adjusted against the un-categorised vacancy and he had given number of examples and precedents of such action.

3. II is also the case of the petitioner that there were originally 12 vacancies in the category of Executive Engineer but on account of reduction of two vacancies, 10 vacancies were still available. The petitioner made representations to this fact which have been placed on record.

4. Per contra, as per reply filed by the respondents, it is the case of the respondent that the petitioner was promoted when two vacancies were made available for deputation in the department of Rajasihan Energy Development Agency (REDA) and on abolition of said two posts in REDA, the petitioner who was adjusted in REDA as one of the Executive Engineer was sent back and for the reason that all the 10 vacancies in me department stood already filled up, the petitioner had to be reverted. It has been contravened that not the first but the 7th vacancy of the roster was available for Scheduled Caste within 100 point roster for the purpose of promotion. According to the respondent the first reservation point for Scheduled Caste comes at point No.7 and second at 13 and, therefore, out of first 10 point of the roster 7th point was reserved for Scheduled Caste but of the time it became ripe for the DPC, no Scheduled Caste was available for the promotion on the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) and it was carried forward. It is Stated that the petitioner was confirmed as Assistant Engineer on 112.1999 and he became eligible only on 112.1999 and he became eligible only on 112.1999. The respondent relies on the instructions in this regard which have been attached as Schedule I, II and III along with the circular which has been marked as Annexure-Rh. According to the respondent it was the 7th vacancy which was to be ear-marked for the Scheduled Caste candidate 7th vacancy is said to have come up for consideration for promotion sometime in the year 1997-98.

5. Reliance is also placed oh the instructions dated 10.2000 attached as Annexure-A to the rejoinder to the effect that the reserved vacancy for SC/ST in all cases of direct recruitment and promotion, wherever applicable, which have remained unfilled in the earlier years i.e. backlog and/or carried forward vacancies would be treated as a separate and distinct