Service Law--Equal Opportunities--If a reserved category candidate has secured more marks than the last general category candidate, he is entitled to be selected against the unreserved seat without being adjusted against the reserved seat.

Mrs. Daya Chaudhary, J.:- This order of mine shall dispose of two Civil Writ Petitions bearing Nos. 7116 of 2015 and 4014 of 2014 as the common question of law and facts are involved in both the petitions. For the sake of convenience, facts are being extracted from C.W.P. No. 7116 of 2015.

2. The prayer in the present petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the selection of reserve category candidates made against the general category to the post of Sub Inspector by ignoring the eligibility criteria as mentioned in the advertisement. A further prayer has also been made for issuing directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to consider the petitioner for the post of Sub Inspector and not to fill up all the posts till the disposal of this writ petition.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that an advertisement for recruitment to 150 posts (120 male +30 female) of Sub Inspector (District Cadre) was issued in the year 2011. Applications were to be submitted from 1.8.2011 to 16.8.2011. The petitioner considering himself eligible applied for the said post. Said posts were to be filled up after conducting physical and written test. Petitioner qualified the physical test and thereafter he was called to appear in the written test. As per process of selection, the merit list was to be prepared category wise on the basis of total marks obtained in written examination and interview. Thereafter, the final merit list was to be prepared after conducting medical test and other formalities. The petitioner appeared in physical test as well as in the written test and thereafter in the interview. The final list was prepared, which had to be category wise but some of the candidates belonging to reserve category i.e. BC and SC (R&O) were also included and were kept at Sr. Nos. 8, 27,37,38,46,47 and 61. All these candidates had already crossed the age of 25 years as on 1.1.2011 as required for general category candidates and hence were ineligible for being considered in general category but still they were selected.

4. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition for quashing of selection of those candidates, who were considered in general category by ignoring the eligibility criteria i.e. the criteria of age.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was entitled to be appointed in the general category as he cleared the physical as well as written test. He is aggrieved by the action of the respondents vide which the reserve category candidates were considered for appointment in general category ignoring their upper age limit of 25 years and has no grouse for inclusion of BC and SC candidates who were in the age group as mentioned in the advertisement. The action of the respondents is violative of principles of natural justice as well as Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel also submits that selection of reserve category candidates has been made contrary to the criteria mentioned in the advertisement. The selected candidates were given benefit of age relaxation but were selected in general category and as such they are not entitled to get double benefit. The petitioner has been deprived of his right to be selected in general category because of inclusion of those candidates in general category. It is also the argument of learned counsel that there is no provision in the Punjab Scheduled Caste and Backward Class (Reservation) Act, 2006 that any candidate belonging to reserve category can be accommodated against the general category post on the basis of higher rank in merit list, despite availing the benefit of age relaxation and as such their selection in the general category is liable to be set aside. At the end, learned counsel submits that the petitioner had secured 66 marks and the last selected candidate secured 63 marks in the written test.

6. In response to notice of motion, reply has bee