IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION (M/S) No. 1559 of 2010 Smt. Yogita and 2 others …. Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …. Respondents. Mr. C.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K.C. Tewari, learned Brief Holder for the respondents. (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) Heard Mr. C.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K.C. Tewari, learned Brief Holder for the respondents. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned advertisement dated 17-7-2010, which provides the reservation to the reserved class category beyond the 50% limit which even exceeds in village of the writ petitioners as in their village the reservation has extended to the 100% of seats as the entire centers have been earmarked for the candidates belonging to the reserved class category. From perusal of record it reveals that the advertisement was issued by respondent No.2 in conformity of the Government Order dated 24-02-2009. In the above G.O. the village centers were reserved for the Scheduled Caste/O.B.C. and other category, on the basis of their population. The Government Order dated 24-02-2009 has been annexed by the petitioners as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition. This G.O. has not been challenged by the petitioners. The main ground raised by learned counsel for the petitioners is that in view of the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Indira Sawahney, reported in 1992, Supreme Volume-III SCC, 2 page 217, no reservation can be made for more than 50%. This argument is misconceived. Since the State Government has formulated specific procedure vide G.O. dated 24.2.2009 for the recruitment of Aaganwari Karyakarti and they are being paid fixed honorarium, hence the situation here is totally different. Further, clause (4) of the G.O. dated 24-02-2009, makes provision for reservation of seats for S.C./ S.T./ O.B.C. candidates, as per the population of the villages. Therefore, the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, referred above, is not applicable in the case in hand. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is dismissed. Dated: 7-9-2010 (B.S. Verma, J. ) ISB 3