RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI Vs. R.S. VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Ramesh Chander Dimri is a practising advocate. He had filed Civil Writ Petition No. 1316 of 1997 alleging that he is a dependent of Ex-serviceman and practices as an advocate in Punjab and Haryana High Court. He applied for recruitment to the Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) in the year 1993. He failed to secure sufficient marks so as to become entitled to be appoinment to the service. He again applied for recruitment to the service in response to advertisement No. 7 of 1996. After passing the written test he was called for interview in November, 1996. He secured 517 marks in the written examination out of 900 marks and 40 marks in viva-voce out of 120 marks. He prayed for a direction to the respondent- Haryana Public Service Commission to recommend his name for appointment to the service. He claimed appointed against the unfilled vacancies of physically handicapped.

(2.) THE writ petition had been heard and a Division Bench of this Court had allowed the same with the following directions :- "(1) The Haryana Public Service Commission should prepare a merit list in addition to the list already sent to the Government by including the names of the candidates who have secured marks in the written examination and viva-voce as well as aggregate marks in terms of the amended Rules 7 and 8 make recommendations to the Government and the High Court for the purpose of appointment to the unfilled vacancies/posts of Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch). (ii) While making recommendations in compliance of the direction No. (1) the commission shall keep in view the law laid down by this court in Jas Karan Singh's case and Dr. Abdul Majid's case, so far as reserved vacancies are concerned. (iii) The necessary exercise shall be completed by the commission within one month of the submission of certified copy of this order. The State Government and the High Court shall then take the required steps and appoint the selected candidates within next six weeks."

(3.) IN the reply filed by the Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana it has been pointed that Haryana Public Service Commission had to prepare the merit list in accordance with the directions given by this Court. As per information received from the Haryana Public Service Commission, the petitioner has not been treated as a dependent of Ex-servicemen since he is a practising advocate. It is denied, therefore, that the order passed by this Court has been violated.