HARBANS SINGH KHADWAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner applied for the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge in response to advertisement issued on 14 -1 -1993 by the Registrar of this Court The advertisement stated that it was on the basis of few anticipated temporary posts likely to occur. According to the petitioner he belongs to Backward Class and the post which fell vacant should have been given to a backward class man as in the roster point it was at point No. 7. How exactly he could assert that it was point No. 7 and it was a vacancy to be filled by Backward Class candidate, it is not clear as the advertisement was issued calling for applications only for anticipated vacancies.

(2.) It is stated in the reply that when backward class candidates who were interviewed by the Committee were found to be not suitable, the post was filled up by appointing respondent No. 3 who belonged to the general category. It is also stated in the reply that it was in exchange of the post for the post of general category.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that such a procedure could not have been adopted by the respondents