BRAHAM DUTT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a member of the Backward Class -A, for which category, there is prescribed percentage of reservation in appointments by way of direct recruitment under the existing policies of the Haryana Government on reservation inter alia for the Backward Classes. The petitioner incidentally also belongs to the Ex -Serviceman category for which there is entitled to reservation separately and by clubbing of both categories, as advertised in this case for filling a single post earmarked for the ESM (BC -A) category. It is this clubbing of vertical and horizontal reservation and mingling of two different identities rolled into one which has led to the present controversy for decision of this Court where a candidate applying under the ESM (BC -A) category has secured more marks than many and not just the last candidate selected in the BC -A category. Should he be shifted up, is the question that searches for an answer. The factual back ground first. The Haryana Staff Selection Commission invited applications for filling up a total of 38 posts of Taxation Inspectors in the Excise and Taxation Department, Haryana under advertisement No. 15 of 2007, Out of these 38 posts, 4 posts were reserved for Backward Class -A category and one post was reserved for ESM (BC -A). The petitioner applied under ESM (BC -A) category.

(2.) THE written test was held on 8.9.2010. This was followed by vice -voce. The final result was declared on 8.9.2010 and the roll number of successful candidates was published in the print media. The petitioner was shown in the waiting list of ESM (BC -A) category. In the result, the marks obtained by the last candidate of BC -A category (vertical reservation) was displayed as 286. The marks obtained by the selected candidate of ESM (BC -A) (horizontal + vertical reservation) category were 315. This candidate is arrayed as respondent No. 4 to this petition and is represented by counsel.

(3.) THE petitioner staked claim for appointment on the ground that the BC -A candidate selected as Ex -Serviceman plus BC -A, respondent No. 4 had secured more marks than many BC -A candidates. The petitioner represented to the Commission that the selected ESM (BC -A) category candidate had secured 315 marks which was more than the last BC -A category candidate selected who secured 286 marks should be shifted to BCA category. In other words, ESM (BC -A) with 315 marks should be allocated BC -A category since that candidate -respondent No. 4 had a right of consideration on account of vertical reservation though he may have also been an Ex -Serviceman. His social birthmark would overwhelm his service category. There is no dispute that ESM candidate is evaluated on yardsticks of horizontal reservation while backward classes fall in mainline vertical reservation. When ESM (BC -A) candidate selected against one advertised post is reallocated on merit position in BC -A category, then he would automatically vacate the single advertised post in the ESM (BC -A) category thus the petitioner deserves appointment from the waiting list against the single post of ESM (BC -A) category of reservation falling vacant on shifting the respondent No. 4.