AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 327 wordsA.S. Gill, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner applied for the post of JBT teacher in response to the advertisement dated 22.12.1997 vide which 2584 posts were advertised. The petitioner belongs to Ex. Servicemen (General Category). Vide impugned instructions the share of Ex-Servicemen (General Category) was 4% out of total 15% reserved for different categories. The petitioner claims that the criteria adopted is manifestly against the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney''s case 1993(1) RSJ 1 (SC) and that for the category of the Exservicemen the reservation cannot be beyond 50% of the posts.
During the pendency of the writ petition the Govt. changed the instructions and drafted the instructions in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court, copy of which has been placed on the record, vide which the quota for the Ex-servicemen (General Category) has been raised.
The learned counsel for the petitioner now contends that in the wake of changed circumstances, the petitioner can be considered for appointment. Out of the total posts advertised only 388 were reserved for Ex-servicemen out of which 260 posts remained vacant and 104 persons from Ex-servicemen of General Category have been appointed.
The Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, states that the petitioner has no right of appointment or his case can be considered. Since, the challenge to the instructions is no more available as these have been changed according to the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court, the respondents are required to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the purpose of selection and appointment in case he comes within th ambit of prescribed quota of E.S.M. Category on merit.
This writ peitition is accordingly allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for seleciton and appointment in accordance wiht law and in case he is found suitable and selected, necessary consequences shall follow.
Petition allowed.