(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of selection of private respondent No. 5 for appointment to the post of driver under Scheduled Caste category in Police Department in District Kullu, H.P. and for directions to respondent-Department to conduct fresh interview to the said post by calling eligible qualified candidates including the petitioner to select a genuine candidate to the said post.
(2.) Undisputed facts in present case are that vide Compulsory Notification dated 12.7.2017, (Annexure R-1 to the reply of respondents-Department), Police Department had notified for recruitment 50 posts of General Duty Constables (Male), 13 posts of General Duty Constables (Female) and 6 posts of Constables (Male) (Driver), in accordance with roster point applicable to the said vacancies, as per vertical and horizontal reservation. In this notification, eligibility condition with respect to age, educational qualification, height and chest, criteria of awarding marks in Physical Standard Tests, minimum qualifying standard in qualifying Physical Efficiency Test and scheme of marks in Written Test was also notified with note that cut of date, for calculation of upper and lower age and reserved category certification limit, was 1.7.2017. Upper age limit for General Category Candidate was 23 years, whereas the same for SC, ST, OBC and Gorkhas was 25 years and for candidates from Home Guards it was 28 years.
(3.) In present case issue with respect to appointment to the post of Constable (Driver) from SC Category is in question. Therefore, breakup of the posts of Constables (Driver) is relevant to be reproduced. At the first instance on 12.7.2019, 6 posts of Constables (Driver) were notified and out of these 6, 3 posts were available for general category and one post each was available for SC (Ex. Servicemen), ST (Antodaya/IRDP) and OBC (Antodaya/IRDP). There was no post available under the SC (General) Category; rather post was available only under its sub-category i.e. SC (Ex. Servicemen).