Back
1996 Supreme(P&H) 321
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
T.H.B.Chalapathi, J.
Sarup Singh
Versus
Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board
Civil Writ Petition No. 856 of 1988,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 20, 1996
Public employment is a new concept of property and every citizen has a right to compete for it. The claims of a person cannot be negatived by adopting unscrupulous methods.
Headnote:
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT - APPOINTMENT - RESERVED CATEGORY - VIOLATION OF RESERVATION POLICY - APPOINTMENT OF LOWER RANKED CANDIDATE - WRIT OF MANDAMUS ISSUED DIRECTING APPOINTMENT OF PETITIONER AS JUNIOR ENGINEER.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, belonging to the Scheduled Caste, applied for the post of Junior Engineer in response to an advertisement by the Board. He stood at No. 3 in the merit list at the interview. However, only two candidates from the Scheduled Caste quota were appointed, and later, one Dalip Singh was appointed on his representation, though he was lower in rank in the merit list.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Board violated the reservation policy by not filling up all the posts reserved for Scheduled Castes and by appointing Dalip Singh, who was lower in rank, on his representation. The court held that the petitioner's right to public employment was violated and that he should have been appointed as a Junior Engineer.
Issues: 1. Whether the Board violated the reservation policy by not filling up all the posts reserved for Scheduled Castes? 2. Whether the appointment of Dalip Singh, who was lower in rank, on his representation was justified?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Board violated the reservation policy by not filling up all the posts reserved for Scheduled Castes. The court relied on the principles of equality and natural justice and held that the petitioner's right to public employment was violated. 2. The court held that the appointment of Dalip Singh, who was lower in rank, on his representation was not justified. The court held that the Board cannot ignore the claims of those persons who stood high up in the list and select and appoint the persons who are lower in the merit list.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the Board to appoint the petitioner as a Junior Engineer as against the reserved category of reserved vacancy for Scheduled Castes. If there is no vacancy at present, the respondents are directed to create a supernumerary post and appoint the petitioner as Junior Engineer in that post.
T.H.B.Chalapathi, J.
1. This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner as Junior Engineer.
2. The respondents advertised 15 posts of Junior Engineers on 21.7. 1986. In response to the said advertisement the petitioner applied under reserved quota as he belongs to Scheduled Caste. Interviews were held on 22nd of October, 1986 but two persons namely Gurmukh Singh and Jagroop Singh were appointed as Junior Engineers as against the reserved quota from among the Scheduled Castes. They joined the service on 112.1987. Thereafter, on coming to know about the selection and appointment of only two candidates from the Scheduled Caste quota, the petitioner fded this writ petition seeking a direction that he should also be appointed as Junior Engineer as he stood at 3rd place in the order of merit among the Scheduled Caste candidates. According to the petitioner, the results of the selection were not intimated either to the petitioner nor was there any publication of the results and even on the notice board of the office of the respondents, the list of selected candidates was not displayed. Therefore, he was not aware of the selection made by the respondents and thereafter, he made enquiries and came to know that Gurmukh Singh and Jagroop Singh were appointed and thereafter one Dalip Singh who fded writ petition No.1625 of 1987 was also appointed as a Junior Engineer by the Board on a representation being made by said Dalip Singh to the Board and the writ fded by Dalip Singh was dismissed as having become infructuous because of his appointment. According to the petitioner, the said Dalip Singh was much lower than the petitioner in the merit list of the Scheduled Castes. Therefore, he filed writ petition on 27.1.1988 seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint him as Junior Engineer as against the reserved posts for Scheduled Castes.
3. The respondents contended, interalia, in their written statement that the writ petition is highly belated and, therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. They further contended that the writ petition was filed by Shri G.S. Sathi, Advocate, for the petitioner and said Shri G.S. Sathi was Legal Advisor of the Board and he was also a member of the recruitment committee and he divulged the secrecy of the selection to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. They further stated that the writ petition filed by Dalip Singh was pending and therefore, according to the respondents there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner applied for the post of Junior Engineer in response to an advertisement given by the respondents to fill up 15 vacancies of Junior Engineers in the Board under quota of reserved vacancies for Scheduled Castes. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly admitted before me today that the petitioner stood at No.3 in the merit list at the interview held on 22.10.1986. There is also no dispute that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste. Therefore, in the normal course, the petitioner ought to have been appointed as the Board made appointments to 20 posts of Junior Engineers in the Boards. There is also no dispute that there is a reservation of 25 per cent of the posts reserved for filling from among the candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes. Therefore, five posts have to be filled up from the category of Scheduled Castes, but the respondent-Board did not fill up the vacancies of 5 candidates from the category of Scheduled Castes. Thus there is a clear violation of reservation policy of the State Government which has been adopted by the Board. It is also asserted before rue by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Dalip Singh was appointed on his representation by the Board while his writ petition was pending in this Court and the writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous because said
