- (1.) The petitioner in response to an advertisement issued by the Haryana Public Service Commission (On short 'Commission') in the year 1988, for 24 posts in the Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch), applied for one of the posts. In the remarks column of the application submitted by the petitioner to the Commission, it was mentioned by him that he was the grandson of a freedom fighter, i.e. Shri Sohan Lal and also appended with the application a certificate issued by the Administrator General and official trustee that Shri Sohan Lal, grand father of the petitioner, was a freedom fighter.
(2.) Out of the 24 posts, which were advertised, 10 posts were reserved for Scheduled Castes of Haryana, 2 for backward classes of Haryana and 3 posts for the Ex-servicemen of Haryana. The State of Haryana had issued instructions on 26th July, 1984 (Copy Annexure P-2 with the writ petition) on the subject of reservation of the posts for the children of freedom fighters in the Haryana State. The relevant extract of the said instructions is reproduced below : "The State Government has further decided to reserve 2% posts in Class I, II, III and IV posts in direct recruitment for the children and grand-children of Freedom Fighters subject to the condition that these 2% posts will be available for Freedom Fighters and their children and grand-children, only if the quota reserved for ex-servicemen, remains unfilled due to non-availability of suitable ex-servicemen or their dependents. This benefit will be available to all grand children i.e. sons and daughters of sons and daughters (paternal as well as maternal) of the freedom fighters." It is clear from these instructions that the State Government had decided to reserve 2% posts in Class I, II, III and IV in direct recruitment for the children and grand-children of freedom fighters subject to the condition that these 2% posts will be available or freedom fighters and their children and grand-children, only if the quota reserved for ex-servicemen, remains unfilled due to non-availability of suitable ex-servicemen, or their dependents.
(3.) The case put forth by the petitioner is that the quota for the ex- servicemen was not completely filled, as only two suitable candidates were available for appointment and one post from the ex-servicemen quota remained unfilled. Accordingly, it is the case of the petitioner, that in accordance with the instructions of the State Government, dated 26th July, 1984, the petitioner who was the grandson of a freedom fighter should have been considered for appointment against that post. However, he was not called for interview by the Commission. This led the petitioner to file the present writ petition.;