R.R.K. Trivedi and Dev Kant Trivedi, JJ. - (1.) The petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint him in the agricultural group services on the basis of the result of Combined State Services Examination of 1993 claiming to be in the category of dependants of freedom fighters entitled to reservation.
(2.) The petitioner, holding a doctorate in Agricultural Economics from Govind Ballabh Pant Agriculture University and Sciences, had appeared in the 1993 Examination of State Combined Services. He appeared in the interview on 16.5.1996 and was declared successful in the agricultural group under the Notification No.40/10/CI/95-96. dated 21.5.1996. He was placed at Sl. No. 20 in the list of successful candidates in the agricultural group. The petitioner had also claimed benefit of reservation being a dependant of freedom fighter which according to him, is 5% of the vacancies. According to the petitioner, the provisions of G. O. dated 30.12.1993 relating to reservation were not fully compiled with by the respondents and they did not issue any appointment letter in favour of the petitioner. The representation was made by the petitioner on 26.8.1997. The petitioner was then informed by the inquiry officer of the Public Service Commission that the petitioner's name has not been forwarded by the U. P. Public Service Commission to the State Government for appointment because his name was deleted from the result declared on 21.5.1996 and the name of one H. K. Ojha who was just after the petitioner, was also deletd and instead of the name of Sri Mahendra Pal Singh was recommended for appointment. According to the petitioner, the deletion of the name of the petitioner, is arbitrary and Illegal and the candidature of the petitioner as a dependant of freedom fighter ought to have been considered in the said quota. It is further alleged that though there were 26 vacancies notified, the results were declared only for 24 posts and that there are 2 posts still lying vacant and the petitioner having been a successful candidate in the general category and as also being entitled to the benefit of reservation for dependants of freedom fighters, should have been recommended for appointment particularly, when in the case of the other State Services includig Administrative. Police or Accounts Services in the year 1993 on the basis of the State Combined Service Examination, no candidate of the category of dependant of freedom fighter has been given the benefit of reservation.
(3.) It has been admitted by the Public Service Commission in its counter-affidavit that the petitioner was declared successful in the agricultural group in the general category though he had applied for as a candidate of the dependant of freedom fighter category in the U. P. Combined State Pre-subordinate Service Main Examination. May, 1993. However, after declaration of final result on 21.5.1996 and before sending the recommendation to the Government, a controversy arose regarding allotment of candidates of reserved categories against the general vacancies and overall merit. A reference was made to the State Government who decided that reserved class candidates who got more marks, have to be allotted vacancies in the general category. In view of the said directions of the State Government, the petitioner and Himanshu Kumar Ojha being two last selected candidates of general category, were ousted from the select list and their results were cancelled. Since no one could be declared successful in the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes category. 3 vacancies of the said category were carried forward. It is also alleged that though the reservation for dependants of freedom fighters is two per cent, no vacancy was reserved for dependant of freedom fighters, physically handicapped and ex-army personnel in overall 206 vacancies because in the Combined Services Examination as the reservation is made postwise. It is admitted that the representation of the petitioner was rejected by the Public Service Commission.;