GURCHARAN SINGH SANDHU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners 1 and 2 were working as Joint Director Agriculture in Agriculture Department while the 3rd petitioner was working as Deputy Director Agriculture while petitioners 4 and 5 were working as Project Officers in the Department of Agriculture. The 2nd respondent was also working as Joint Director Agriculture in the Agriculture Department. On 1.3.1979 a tentative seniority list of Punjab Agricultural Service (Class I) Officers was published. In the said list the 2nd respondent was shown as junior to the petitioners. The 2nd respondent belongs to Scheduled Castes. When two vacancies in the post of Joint Directors arose one Sukhdev Singh and the 2nd respondent were promoted on the ground that two posts out of seven posts were reserved for the members of the Scheduled Castes. According to the petitioners, the Government reserved only 14% vacancies to be filled up by the members of the Scheduled Castes. Filling up of two vacancies by the members of the Scheduled Castes far exceeded the percentage of reservation. The petitioners also averred that in civil writ petition 3882 of 1981 this Court held by its judgment dated 25.5.1982 that for working out the percentage the promotees/appointees in the cadre - whether on the basis of reservation or otherwise - have to be taken notice of and that any promotions of the members of the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes made beyond the prescribed limit on the basis of instructions of the Government are void and non est .

(2.) The 2nd respondent filed a written statement that his promotion was challenged in civil writ petition No. 260 of 1979 by one Jagjit Singh and that the said writ petition was dismissed and the judgment in CWP 3882 of 1981 was subject matter of Special Leave Petition filed in Supreme Court of India. He, however, admitted that a seniority list was issued in the year 1979 and according to that seniority list he was junior to the petitioners but he has been promoted as Joint Director in the year 1979. He belongs to Scheduled Castes category and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) There is no dispute that seven posts of Joint Directors were available at the time when the 2nd respondent was promoted. It is also undisputed that 14% of the vacancies were reserved to the Scheduled Castes. Therefore, only one vacancy was available to the Scheduled Castes candidate. It is also not in dispute that Sukhdev Singh who was junior to the 2nd respondent and who also belongs to Scheduled Castes was promoted. Therefore, the promotion of the 2nd respondent was in excess of the quota reserved for Scheduled Castes. I need not to go into the several contentions raised on behalf of the parties in view of the latest decision of the Supreme Court in Ajit Singh Januja and others v. State of Punjab and others, 1996 AIR(SC) 1189(SC) wherein considering various authorities their Lordships of Supreme Court held as follows :-