VIKAS J KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner seeks mandamus directing respondents No. 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner to the post of Upper Division clerk as per instructions issued by the Government, as also a direction that appointments of respondents No. 5 to 10 be quashed.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste, but he was appointed as Lower Division Clerk against an open post. Respondent No. 4 Municipal Council was required to fill up the post of the upper Division Clerk. Since, according to the roster point the first position would go to Scheduled Caste candidate, the petitioner staked his claim for the post of Upper Division Clerk on the plea that he belongs to Scheduled Caste. Respondent No. 4 refused to consider the petitioner for the post of Upper division Clerk against the Scheduled Caste vacancy for which backlog existed as the petitioner had been appointed under open category and so he was not entitled for appointment to the post against roster point. Respondent No. 4 promoted respondent No. 5, a candidate belonging to the general category as also respondents No. 6 to 10 to the said post as and when occasion to fill vacancies arose. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this court.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. Godinho, learned Counsel for the petitioner, mr. Nadkarni for respondent No. 4 and Mr. Ambekar for respondent No. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that this issue has already been concluded by a Judgment of this Court dated 9. 10. 98 in Shri Manohar v. Parwar vs. State of Goa and others, (Writ Petition No. 408 of 1992)following the Judgment of the Apex Court in R. K. Sabharwal and ors. vs. State of Punjab and ors. , (AIR 1995 SC 1371) as regards following a roster in the appointment of candidates in the reserved category.