VIJAY KUMAR DHANIA Vs. DELHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved in this petition is very short. Respondent No. 2, Maitri Mahitia College (hereinafter to be referred as "College") issued an advertisement on 10.9.95, inter lia, adverting the post of Professional Assistant (Library) and invited application for the said post. The post was in General Category. Petitioner applied for the said post of professional Assistant (Library) and vide letter dated 27.9.95 he was called for interview. He appeared in interview on 11.10.95 but was not selected and one Mr. Pradeep Rai was selected. However, he made representations dated 12.10.95, 19.10.95 and 24.10.95 to the Principal of the College demanding that the post of professional Assistant (Library) should be reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate and he being the only eligible candidate for Scheduled Caste category, he should be appointed to the said post. These representations were followed by various other representations. Petitioner even approached the National Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and sent representation to Forum of Academic for Social Justice. It is alleged that before the National Commission, a compromise was arrived at wherein petitioner was offered the post of Care-Taker in lieu of Professional Assistant (Library) but he was not appointed to the post of Care-Taker. Accordingly, on 19.8.1998 he made another representation to National Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes but as he did not receive any reply for 2/3 months, petitioner filed present petition in October, 1998.

(2.) In this writ petition petitioner claims that the post of Professional Assistant (Library) should have been reserved for SC/ST category and he should be appointed to the said post.. The prayer clause reads as under:

(3.) Counter-affidavit has bean filed by the Principal of the College in which it is stated that the post of Professional Assistant (Library) js a solitary post in the College and, therefore, there cannot be any reservation to the said post in SC/CT category. It is mentioned that reservation for SC/ST category prescribed by University does not apply to the said solitary post because application of a roster would amount to 100% reservation, which is impermissible under Article 16(4) of the Constitution. Thus according to respondents this post could not have been reserved for SC/ST category and action of the Respondent- College filling up of the post from candidate belonging to General Category was proper.