SHAFIQ-UL-ISLAM MIR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy involved in the present petition relates to allocation of vacancies to the reserved categories for various feeding services and Junior Scale KAS posts for which selection process has been initiated by the respondents through the medium of Combined Services Competitive Examination. The petitioners belong to reserved categories of backward area, Social Caste and Scheduled Tribe respectively. 124 posts of Junior Scale KAS and feedings services under the umbrella of Combined Services Competitive Examination were referred to the Public Service Commission for selection. These vacancies were notified vide Notification No. PSC/Exam -02/9 dated 20.02.2002 whereby applications were invited from eligible candidates for preliminary examination. The result of the preliminary examination was declared vide Notification dated 13.11.2002 and the candidates were invited to appear in the main examination in the ratio of 1:13. The Public Service Commission notified the vacant posts as existed at the time of initial notification dated 20.02.2002 as also on 27.11.2002 at the time of main examination vide notification No. PSC -ExM -02/69 dated 27.11.2002. Since dispute relates to only three reserved categories, i.e. Residents of Backward Areas, Social Caste and Scheduled Tribe. Reference is made only to these categories. Vide latter notification dated 27.11.2002, as many as 26 vacancies have been invited under the RBA category and 12 in Scheduled Tribe and no vacancy has been notified for Social Caste.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not adhered to the quota prescribed under SRO 126 of 1994 for aforementioned three reserved categories. It is submitted that either the vacancies have been diverted to other categories or withheld in gross contravention of the provisions of SRO 126 of 1994. They accordingly seek direction for adhering to the quota and the candidates be summoned for main examination keeping in view the quota prescribed under the aforesaid SRO and in the ratio as notified. The Public Service Commission as also State respondents filed their objections/reply. So far reply filed by the Public Service Commission is concerned, it is stated that it is the prerogative of the government to maintain the roster for the reserved categories. Public Service Commission being the only selection body has to make selection against the vacancies as notified and communicated to the Commission. State respondents in their objections have stated that initially 124 vacancies were referred to Public Service Commission on 11.12.2001 for selection against the available posts through the medium of Combined Services Competitive Examination in accordance with the SRO 161 of 1995 dated 11.12.2001 on the basis of information provided by various departments. It is further stated that subsequently departments were requested to re -furnish the information and on the basis of fresh information it was found that nine posts each from the J&K Revenue Gazetted Service and J&K Accounts Gazetted Service, which were referred to Public Service Commission in fact, did not exist. In the meanwhile, 32 additional posts became available during the year 2002 and the same were also referred to the Public Service Commission and after withdrawal of some of the vacancies and reference of further posts, ultimately 138 posts became available for selection as against 124 posts initially referred. In respect to the allocation of vacancies for reserved categories, it is stated that Rule 14 of the SRO 126 of 1994 has been followed in its spirit which interalia prescribed filling up the vacancies from each category service wise and not in totality.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. According to Mr. Abrol learned counsel for petitioner quota prescribed under SRO 126 is provided under Rule 10 of the SRO 126 of 1994, which prescribed following percentages for three reserved categories to which the petitioners belong. Scheduled Tribe : 10 % Socially & Educationally Backward Classes : 2% Residents of Backward Areas : 20 % According to learned counsel for petitioner in view of the percentage prescribed under Rule 10, there should be 14 vacancies under the Scheduled Tribe category, 27 under the Residents of Backward Area and 2 under Social Castes respectively whereas under Notification dated 27.11.2002, 12 vacancies have been reserved under the Scheduled Tribe, 26 under Residents of Backward Areas and no vacancy has been reserved for Social Caste. According to him, this is a violation of SRO 126 of 1994. The allocation of vacancies is to be made in accordance with the provisions of Rules 10,11 and 14, which are reproduced hereunder: