JUDGEMENT
AMITAVA LALA, J. -
(1.) THIS writ petition has been made to obtain an appropriate direction upon
the Registrar General of this High Court
to keep 2% of the posts in direct
recruitment to U.P.H.J.S.- 09 reserved for
the candidates of dependent of freedom
fighters. The learned counsel has relied
upon U.P. Public Services (Reservation of
Physically Handicapped, Dependence of
Freedom Fighters and Ex-servicemen)
(Amendment) Act 1997. He said that by
way of amendment in Section 3 (1) there
shall be reservation at the stage of direct
recruitment in public services i.e. two per
cent of vacancies for dependents of
freedom fighters and one per cent of
vacancies for ex-servicemen.
(2.) HOWEVER , we have considered the Constitution Bench judgement of the
Supreme Court reported in 2000 (IV)
SCC 640 State of Bihar and another Vs.
Bal Mukund Sah and others which
speaks as follows:-
"Any scheme of reservation foisted on the High Court without consultation with it directly results in truncating the High Court's power of playing a vital role in the recruitment of eligible candidates to fill up these vacancies and hence such appointments on reserved posts would remain totally ultra vires the scheme of the Constitution enacted for that purpose by the Founding Fathers."
We have also gone through the Full Bench judgement of our High Court
reported in 2005 (4) ESC 2378 (All)
Sarika Vs. State of U.P. and others
where also it has been held that the
reservation will be made, if required, for
the judicial service by the State
Government, then it should be made in
consultation with the High Court.
Therefore, when such Full Court of this
High Court did not approve any such
proposal for reservation, we are of view
that the prayer of the petitioner cannot be
considered and as such writ petition is
liable to be dismissed and is accordingly
dismissed, however, without imposing
any cost.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.