Rajiv Sharma, Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore, JJ. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has come before this Court with the prayer to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 8.10.2010 and 4.6.2010, passed by respondent No. 2 -Cadre Authority, Cooperative Bank Centralized Services and also to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 2 to consider and appoint the petitioner on the post of Deputy General Manager in District Co -operative Bank against reservation quota of 2% provided for the dependents of freedom -fighter in the selection held in pursuance of advertisement No. C -20/2009 dated 26.6.2009.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present writ petition, in brief, are as under: - - (I) The respondent No. 1 issued an advertisement No. C -20/2009 dated 26.6.2009 for filling up 9 posts of Deputy General Manager. Admittedly, the petitioner was dependent of freedom -fighter and had applied for the same category but he was not selected, hence he filed Writ Petition No. 1801 of 2009, which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 4.12.2009, directing therein that in case any representation is submitted before the Competent Authority, the Competent Authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of one month. (II) In compliance of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 4.12.2009, the petitioner made a representation on 10.12.2009 and by the impugned order, the same was rejected. Feeling aggrieved by the said order of rejection, present writ petition has been filed. (III) The claim of the petitioner, in brief, is that 2% quota of the freedom fighters ought to have been worked out taking into account the total strength of the cadre to be filled up by direct recruitment. It is further submitted that there are 37 posts in the cadre to be filled up by direct recruitment, therefore, 2% reservation would come to 0.74 which, when rounded of comes to one and as such the petitioner was entitled to be appointed on the post of Deputy General Manager against 2% reservation quota provided for the dependents of freedom fighters. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents have calculated the quota on the basis of vacancies advertised. In case the quota is worked out on the basis of the vacancies advertised then it would amount to denial of the benefit so given by the Legislature.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents has argued that the quota provided to dependents of freedom fighter, ex -serviceman and physically handicapped as per rules, is a horizontal reservation and it has to be worked out on the basis of the vacancies advertised and not on the basis of the total cadre strength. It is further submitted that representation of the petitioner was rightly rejected.;