- (1.) A. P. Sahi, J. These writ petitions raise a challenge to the selections on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The selections have been held by the U. P. Public Service Commission under a requisition of the Irrigation Department pursuant whereto the posts were advertised on 22-12-2000.
(2.) ALL the writ petitions have been heard together and are connected as they raise common questions of law and fact and the petitioners in the writ petitions are of the general category who are aggrieved by the results declared as they do not find themselves finally selected which they allege is a result of an arbitrary action on the part of the respondents for which several grounds have been urged on their behalf. A requisition was made by the Irrigation Department, Government of U. P. , on 20-10-1999 pursuant whereto an advertisement was issued on 22-12-2000 and the last date for filling up the applications was 27-1-2001. The said advertisement which is Annexure-1 to the leading petition discloses the total number of posts vacant and available for selection as 954. The break up of the said posts disclosed in the Advertisement is 477 posts for the general category, 257 posts for the other backward category, 200 posts for the Schedule Caste category and 20 posts for the Schedule Tribes category. The examinations were conducted on 22/23-12-2001 and the results of the written examinations was declared on 6-10- 2005. In between this period, it is to be noted that the Supreme Court on 21-1-2002 passed an interim order in a Special Leave Petition restraining the issuance of any executive instructions pursuant to the amendment brought about in the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Schedule Castes, Schedule Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 through U. P. Act No. 21 of 2001. In view of the aforesaid stay order granted by the Supreme Court, the Government of U. P. in its wisdom, proceeded to restore the position of the 1994 Act in consonance with the decision in the case of R. K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab, 1995 (1) LBESR 693 (SC) : (1995) 2 SCC 745, and also amend the Act suitably in the light of the provisions of Article 16 (4-B) of the Constitution of India. Consequently this took the shape of an Act namely U. P. Act No. 1 of 2002 and the issuance of 2 ordinances namely Ordinance No. 2 of 2002 promulgated on 6-6-2002 and U. P. Ordinance No. 7 of 2002 promulgated on 25-6-2002. As a consequence of these developments between the issuance of the advertisement and the declaration of the results of the written examinations, the Chief Engineer of the Irrigation Department who had earlier sent the requisition for selections sent a letter on 6-11-2003 intimating the Secretary of the Public Service Commission that in view of the reorganization of the State of U. P. and the creation of the new State of Uttaranchal, 2 per cent reduction in the vacancies advertised for direct recruitment has to be made and further due to more vacancies available in the year 2003-04, the total number of posts against which selections were to be conducted was reduced to 887 against 954 earlier advertised. The break up of the said 887 posts was given as 260 posts for the general category, 391 for the other backward category, 223 for the Schedule Caste Category and 13 for the Schedule Tribes category. The said modification brought about a change in the number of posts available for each category as against the original advertisement of 954 posts. Two letters were issued by the Chief Engineer on 13-10-2005 and 25-10-2005 stating therein that the corrigendum dated 6-11-2003 should be understood as a request for 520 posts for general recruitment and 367 posts for special recruitment.
(3.) THE Commission in view of the aforesaid changes had also asked for option from the reserved category candidates as to their choice to be considered against 520 posts of general recruitment or against the 367 posts of special recruitment meant exclusively for reserved category. THE reserved category candidates appear to have given their option for the special recruitment category of 367 posts referred to herein above. THE interview was held thereafter between 21-11-2005 to 12-1-2006 where after the final results were declared on 12-3-2006. THE petitioners in all the writ petitions who belong to the general category did not find themselves selected and, as such, aggrieved they filed the present writ petitions. This Court, in the leading writ petition, passed an interim order restraining the respondents from making any appointment against the 367 posts the results whereof were declared under the heading of special recruitment posts. What is to be noted is that there were only 4 petitioners in the leading writ petition, one petitioner in the second writ petition, 2 petitioners in the third writ petition and one petitioner in the fourth writ petition. Thus, there were only 8 petitioners before this Court in all. Impleadment applications have been filed on behalf of some of the selected candidates from amongst those 367 against whom the interim order was passed. THE impleadment applications have been accepted on record as the applicants are all affected parties and are entitled to be heard under the provisions of Chapter XXII Rule 5-A of the Allahabad High Court Rules. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 by one Sri Har Prasad, Executive Engineer, and a supplementary-affidavit sworn by the same person which indicates the total cadre strength of the Junior Engineers in the concerned department for which the selections have been held. Another counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the U. P. Public Service Commission through Sri Radhey Lal and a short-counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the proposed respondents stating therein that the change brought about before the final selections for giving effect to reservation does not in any way affect the general category candidates as the 367 selected candidates in no way encroach upon the posts of the general category and none of the rights of the petitioners are prejudiced.;