TMI Blog1993 (5) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Service. The orders of the State Government relating to persons belonging to Schedule Castes in this regard which have a bearing in this appeal are as follows: (1) Letter dated June 6, 1974 from the Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes Department to all Heads of Department etc. It was communicated that it had been decided to increase the percentage of reservation in direct recruitment in all services from 20% to 25% in the case of members of Scheduled Castes and from 2% to 5% in the case of members belonging to Backward Classes. In the said letter, it was also indicated that the vacancies to be reserved for the members of Scheduled Castes in a lot of 100 vacancies would be at the points specified below: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 61, 65, 69, 73, 77, 81, 85, 89, 93 and 97 and so on. It was also directed that the Roster already existing would not be abandoned, but would now be maintained in continuation from the vacancy in the existing Roster last filled up according to the new pattern of reservation that has been prescribed in the earlier paragraphs in the said letter. (2) Circular dated N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that these instructions are to be implemented when the names of the candidates of Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs are included in the merit list after selection. If no candidate belonging to these communities has been selected or less candidate selected then the reserved vacancy should be filled up from amongst the other Scheduled Castes candidates meaning thereby no reserve vacancy reserved for Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs should be carried forward. 3. After the introduction of Rule 8-A in the Rules, four persons were appointed by way of direct recruitment to the Service in the year 1979. One out of them, Shri Balwant Rai, belonged to a Scheduled Caste (other than Balmikis or Mazhabi Sikhs). Thereafter, in 1981, one post fell vacant but no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste could be selected and the candidate belonging to general category was appointed against the said post. In the year 1982, selection was made for two posts but only one person could be selected and he also belonged to the general category and no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste was available for appointment. In 1986, six persons including the appellant and respondent No. 3 were appointed on the basis of dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has been rightly assigned Point No. 8. If Respondent Rs. 3 has to be assigned Point No. 7, as found by the High Court, then he would be senior to the appellant but if Respondent No. 3 is assigned Point Rs. 9 then appellant would be senior to Respondent Rs. 3. It is, therefore, necessary to determine whether respondent No. 3 is entitled to be placed at Point Rs. 7 in the Roster in place of Shri G.S. Samra who should be placed at Point No. 9, or that the respondent Rs. 3 should be assigned Point No. 9 of the Roster. The said question requires consideration of the various orders relating to reservation for Scheduled Castes to which reference has been made earlier. As indicated earlier by letter dated June 6, 1974 points 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 61, 65, 69, 73, 77, 81, 85, 89, 93 and 97 in the Roster are reserved for members of Scheduled Castes. By letter dated May 5, 1975, 50% of the vacancies of the quota reserved for Scheduled Castes are required to be offered to Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs, if available, as a first preference from amongst the Scheduled Castes candidates. In view of the clarifications contained in the letter dated April 8, 1980 on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zhabi Sikhs at point No. 9. It was submitted that Shri G.S. Samra who belonged to a Scheduled Caste other than Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs was entitled to be appointed against the reserved vacancy at Point No. 5 reserved for a candidate belonging to a Scheduled caste other than Balmikis nd Mazhabi Sikhs but since at the time of selections that were made in the years 1981 and 1982, no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste was available. The vacancy at Point No. 5 reserved for Scheduled Castes was carried forward to point No. 7 and Shri G.S. Samra had to be adjusted at point No. 7 in the Roster. The submission is that respondent No. 3, being a Mazhabi Sikh, could not claim to be placed at point No. 7 in the Roster against a vacancy which was reserved for a candidate belonging to a Scheduled Castes other than Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs and he could be only placed against the vacancy at point No. 9 in the Roster. 8. The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3 on the other hand has urged that in view of the order dated May 5, 1975, 50% vacancies of the quota reserved for Scheduled Castes have to be offered to Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs and since Shri Balwant Rai belonging to a Schedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of the post on which Shri Bal want Rai was appointed in 1979 and the said appointment has to be regarded as having been made against the vacancy at point No. 1 in the roster which was reserved for Balmikis or Mazhabi Sikhs but since no Balmiki or Mazhabi Sikh was selected for that post, the said vacancy was assigned to Shri Bal want Rai who belonged to a Scheduled Caste other than a Balmiki or Mazhabi Sikh. The said vacancy which was reserved for Balmik is or Mazhabi Sikhs could not be carried forward in view of the directions contained in the letter dated April 8, 1980. The next post reserved for Scheduled Castes at point No. 5 in the roster was meant for a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste other than Balmik is and Mazhabi Sikhs. In the selections that were made in 1981 and 1982 no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste was selected and, therefore, posts at Points Nos. 5 and 6 in the Roster became available to candidates in the general category and the vacancy at Point Rs. 5 reserved for Scheduled Castes was carried forward to point No. 7. In 1986, two persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, namely Shri G.S. Samra and respondent No. 3 were selected. Shri G.S. Samra belon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the merit list were appointed and the appellant was appointed on the post of A Class Tehsildar in one of the Allied Services. Subsequently, one of the two candidates who had been appointed to the Punjab Civil Service resigned his office and a question arose as to whether the appellant was entitled to be appointed to the Punjab Civil Service against the vacancy arising on account of resignation of the Scheduled Castes candidate who had been appointed earlier. The appellant laid his claim for such appointment on the basis of the instructions contained in the circular of March 6, 1961. The said claim of the appellant was upheld by this Court and it was held that the resultant vacancy caused by resignation of one of the Scheduled Castes candidate should have gone to the appellant. The Circular dated March 6, 1961 and the decision in Jagjit Singh v. State of Punjab (supra) do not have a bearing on the question in controversy in the instant case because here there is no dispute that the respondent No. 3 has been appointed against the post reserved for members of Scheduled Castes and the question is about the inter se placement of two persons appointed against vacancies reserved for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
