IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPs No. 305, 306, 311, 314 and 315 of 2011. Decided on: 21st February, 2011. 1. CWP No.305 of 2011. Yodh Raj. vs. State of H.P. & others. 2. CWP No.306 of 2011. Budhi Dev. vs. State of H.P. & others. 3. CWP No.311 of 2011. Meera Devi. vs. State of H.P. & others. 4. CWP No.314 of 2011. Pinku Devi. vs. State of H.P. & others. 5. CWP No.315 of 2011. Rakesh Kumar. vs. State of H.P. & others. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioners : Ms. Bhavana Dutta, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners are aggrieved since they have not been granted the regular appointment, despite their eligibility for the same in the earmarked vacancies against 3% quota of the physically challenged persons. This Court has already considered the matter leading to Annexure P-4, judgment, wherein the following directions have been issued: 2 “There will be a direction to the Director, Animal Husbandry to see whether 3% quota of disabled persons has been met in the category of regular Beldars. In case there is deficiency in the 3% quota in the cadre strength of regular Beldars, the persons recruited in these cases shall be adjusted against those regular vacancies, since the recruitment process is the same for daily wages Beldars and regular Beldars. We make it clear that it is open to the Animal Husbandry Department to earmark separate quota of 3% as against the daily waged Beldars as well, subject to fulfillment of regular Beldars in the earmarked quota of 3%. Needful adjustments in the case of the petitioners in the light of this judgment shall be done by the Director, Animal Husbandry, within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioners. Consequential benefits shall also be disbursed within another period of two months.” 2. These writ petitions are also disposed of in terms of the direction, as above, with a direction to the Director to take appropriate action in the case of the petitioners herein also within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner concerned. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 21st February, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr/K) Judge. 3 4