Separate merit-based filling of disability quota backlog posts valid without batch-wise; participation estops post-non-selection challenge; no prejudice as competitive within category.

JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. Precisely, the question, which needs to be determined in the case at hand, is that “whether petitioner’s right to seek benefit of reservation under the 4% quota for persons with disabilities in batch-wise selection to the post of JBT could have been denied by the respondent-State on the pretext that posts reserved for persons with disabilities under 4% quota shall be filed up separately by the Department of Social Justice & Empowerment”?

2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner, is that 187 posts of JBT reserved for Persons with Disabilities, proposed to be filled up by the Department of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh vide Annexure P-6 are required to be filed up on batch-wise basis strictly as per Recruitment & Promotion Rules (for short “R&P Rules) framed by the respondent-Department for the post of Junior Basic Teacher Class-III(Non-Gazetted) in the Department of Elementary Education, but respondents, without amending the R&P Rules, have devised a new method for filling up the said posts under the quota reserved for the persons with disabilities by inviting applications from all the persons belonging to the said category, who thereafter shall be selected on the basis of marks to be allotted on the basis of essential qualifications prescribed in the R&P Rules and the percentage of their disabilities, as a result thereof, petitioner, who, though as per R&P Rules, possesses requisite qualification, but was waiting for his turn for appointment on batch-wise basis against a seat reserved for persons with disabilities, is now compelled to compete with the candidates, who though may be eligible under the disability quota, but have recently acquired the educational qualification otherwise prescribed in the R&P Rules.

3. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner argued that once in terms of R&P Rules, 50% posts are required to be filled up on batch-wise basis, coupled with the fact that there is a specific provision in the R&P Rules for reservation to various categories including persons with disabilities, there was no occasion for the respondents to adopt all together new method of selection, which is detrimental to the interest of hundred of persons belonging to the said category, who otherwise have been waiting for their turn to come on batch-wise basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that till the time R&P Rules are not amended qua specific provision providing therein reservation in the selection of batch-wise basis, respondents otherwise could not have resorted to altogether new procedure for offering appointments to the persons with disabilities directly against the backlog of 187 posts.

4. While making this Court peruse the material adduced on record, Mr. Bhushan, further submitted that in past, posts reserved for vario